177 



The study group will meet in July, and will report prior to the 

 October conference. Needless to say, we were heartened at the re- 

 sponse, and will follow up our proposal in July, at the October con- 

 ference, and at a planned extraordinary session of the IMCO Council 

 in November. 



In sum, Mr. Chairman, we are at a critical stage in the development 

 of an effe€tive system for protecting the marine environment. There 

 are risks ahead, and there is opposition to some of our positions. But 

 there is also strong support and great potential for making this year 

 the one in which the international community moved to meet both the 

 standard-setting and institutional aspects of the challenge of protec- 

 ting the seas from vessel-source pollution. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Senator Hollings. Thank you very much. 



Senator Stevens. Mr. Train, is part of your proposal going to be 

 that the contracting states would agree to close the ports to any 

 tankers which do not meet the standards that the agreement 

 establishes? 



Mr. Traix. Yes; Senator Stevens, the United States has proposed 

 that all contract ins: states be required, at a given future date, to deny 

 access to their ports to any tankers, whether registered in a contract- 

 ing state oi- not. whirli do not comply with the convention standards. 



Senator Stea-exs. We have legislated. I think last year. Chairman 

 Magnuson and I, I recall, worked on tightening up a bill that per- 

 tained to the Coast Guard's authority. 



Mr. Train. The Ports and Waterway Safety Act. 



Senator Stevens. We can prevent them from offloading under exist- 

 ing law, but, if these tankers are outside national jurisdiction and are 

 not from countries signatory to the agreement, how are we going to 

 stop them from polluting the ocean ? 



Mr. Train. I believe they will be registered in all likelihood in coun- 

 tries that are signatory to the agreement. As I indicated before. Sena- 

 tor, under the U.S. proposal contracting states would have the duty 

 to close their ports to any ship which does not comply with the con- 

 vention standards, and the power to bring actions against any ship in 

 their ports for anv pollution violation, no matter where it occurred. 

 We believe that if enough countries with large amounts of seaborne 

 trade adhere to the convention, these proposals will put strontr pres- 

 sure on countries with large merchant fleets to comply with the 

 convention. 



Now, of course, the extent of a coastal state's jurisdiction over ships 

 which do not enter its ports is a much more difficult question, one which 

 the Law of the Sea Conference will have to resolve. As you may know, 

 the United States has resisted the demands of many countries for ex- 

 tensive jurisdiction over passing ships out to 200 miles from shore. 

 Senator Stevens. Canada, of course, has already challenged that. 

 Mr. Tr^vin. The United States feels verv strongly that limiting en- 

 forcement to action by the flag nation is inadequate, and we are very 

 insistent that there must also be, in addition, authority to enforce by 

 the port countries, so that irrespective of flag and irrespective of 

 where a violation takes place on the high seas, we can enforce the 

 convention against the ship of any signatory nation. 



