197 



meiit. This equipment in our opinion, is the key element in the system from 

 the point of view of control and enforcement. 



Annex II, which concerns itself with noxious substances other than oil, was 

 developed around a GESAMP ( Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of 

 Marine Pollution) hazard evaluation. This annex establishes quantitive limits 

 on the amount of regulated substances which can be discharged and insures 

 that any permitted discharge is done in such a manner as to preclude any harm- 

 full level of discharge. Annex II, I might add. will be the vehicle by whicli the 

 IMCO recommended Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying 

 Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk will be implemented. 



Overall, the fifth draft is replete with minority opinions in the form of foot- 

 notes and issues contained within "brackets" which must be resolved prior to the 

 October Conference. Much work is yet to be accomplished here in the United 

 States in the form of positions, alternatives, "fallback" positions, technicalities, 

 etc. prior to October. 



We are hopeful that a strong, comprehensive, and enforceable convention with 

 realistic dates of application encompassing the United States' position will 

 result, thus obviating the necessity of resorting to unilateral action. Our task 

 gi-oup is working toward that goal. 



At the risk of being repetitive, we certainly recognize the undesirability of 

 unilateral action as, I believe, did the drafters of Title II of the Ports and Water- 

 ways Safety Act of 1972. We look upon Title II as the enabling legislation nec- 

 essary to give effect to the results of this forthcoming international conference 

 providing, of course, its results will meet the intent of our national legislation. 



The Intervention Convention relating to intervention on the high seas in cases 

 of oil pollution casualties, 1969, authorizes necessary measures on the high seas 

 to prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and imminent danger to the coastline or 

 related interests of the United States from pollution or threat of pollution of 

 the sea by oil which may reasonably be expected to result in major harmful 

 consequences. The interests protected include fish, shellfish and other living 

 marine resources, wildlife, coastal zone and estuarine activities, and public and 

 private .shoreline and beaches. 



The CcKiveutiou incorporates an elaborate system of consultations before un- 

 dertaking intervention. While those consultations could be considered an im- 

 pediment to effective action, there is express recognition of the fact that, in cases 

 of extreme urgency, the coastal state may have to take action without prior 

 notification or consultation, or while consultations are still in progress. Thus, 

 while the actions authorized are most carefully circumscribed, latitude is 

 afforded for prompt intervention in ai>propriate circumstances. 



The Convention also provides a measure of damages for excessive interven- 

 tion action. The United States will be obliged to pay compensation to the extent 

 that damage is caused by activity which exceeds those measures reasonaI»ly nec- 

 essary. Article VIII of the Brussels Intervention Convention provides for con- 

 ciliation or, if conciliation does not succeed, arl>itration as provided for in the 

 Annex to the Convention. The October Conference as I mentioned earlier is 

 expected to extend this Intervention Convention to include substances other 

 than oil. 



We consider that S. 1070 affords an excellent basis for any intervention which 

 may be neces.sary to protect United States interest without unduly exposing 

 maritime interests to arbitrary or capricious actions. We consider S. 1067 whicli 

 contains the 1969 and 1971 amendments to the 1954 Convention to provide a 

 much greater degree of control of pollution of the sea than presently exists 

 in national legislation. We urge this Subcommittee to report favorable on both 

 these bills and hope for their early passage; hopefully, before the Conference 

 convenes in October. 



Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. My accompanying staff 

 and I will be happy to attempt to answer any questions which you may have. 



Thank you Sir. 



Statement of William C. Salmon. Deputy Director, Office of Environmental 



Affairs, Department of State 



Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee : It is a pleasure for me to ap- 

 pear before you today to testify on behalf of three bills : S. 1067, a bill to amend 

 the Oil Pollution Act of 1961 in order to implement the 1969 and the 1971 amend- 

 ments to the 1954 International Convention for the Prevention of the Pollution of 

 the Sea by Oil ; S. 1070, a bill to implement the 1909 International Convention 



