93 



inconsistent and irresponsible action compared to the highly respon- 

 sible position the Monitor environmental groups have consistently 

 taken during the past 4 years, and our recent position as reflected 

 in the EDF brief. 



I have a few additional remarks I would like to make that are not 

 in my prepared statement, sir; and I will be brief. 



I want to address the point that has already been raised about the 

 applicability of the National Environmental Policy Act, the pro- 

 posed transfer of purse seiners to foreign flag. 



We asked one of Monitor's lawyers, Mr. Leonard Meeker, a very 

 distinguished lawyer who at one time was the senior lawyer in the 

 State Department and has handled cases for the Monitor Consortium, 

 to investigate the applicability to the question of proposed transfer 

 of foreign-flag purse seiners. 



In summary, he responded to the letter and in summary he said 

 as follows: 



"In the light of the determinations made by Congress in the Ma- 

 rine Mammal Protection Act and of the facts that have been de- 

 veloped concerning the consequences of unrestricted tuna fishing 

 without regard to incidental kill of porpoise, it would seem that a 

 decision leading to such unlimited tuna fishing would constitute a 

 'major Federal action' within the meaning of the National Environ- 

 mental Policy Act. As indicated earlier, a decision to approve the 

 transfer of American tuna boats to foreign registry could lead to 

 widespread transfers of vessels and to their fishing without regard 

 to the restrictions adopted by the Department of Commerce under 

 the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Such transfers would be for 

 the purpose of avoiding application of the Department of Commerce 

 regulations and for the purpose of conducting tuna fish operations 

 free of any such restrictions." 



Mr. Chairman, may I ask that the entire letter from Mr. Meeker 

 be included in the record? 



Mr. Leggett. That will be included in the record at this point. 



[The following was received for the record :] 



Center fob Law and Social Policy, 

 Washington, D.C., February 17, 1977. 

 Col. Milton M. Kaufmann, 



U.S.A.F. Retired, President, Monitor, Inc., 13^6 Connecticut Avenue N.W., 

 Washington, D.C. 



Dear Colonel Kaufmann : You have asked my views as to the applicability 

 of the National Environmental Police Act to a possible decision by the Mari- 

 time Administration of the Department pf Commerce to approve the transfer 

 to foreign registry of American vessels engaged in fishing for tuna in the 

 Pacific Ocean. 



Federal law requires the approval of the Secretary of Commerce — 



"* * * t se \\ f mortgage, lease, charter, deliver, or in any manner transfer, 

 or agree to sell, mortgage, lease, charter, deliver, or in any manner transfer, 

 to any person not a citizen of the United States, or transfer or place under 

 foreign registry or flag, any vessel or any interest therein owned in whole 

 or in part by a citizen of the United States and documented under the laws of 

 the United States, or the last documentation of which was under the laws of 

 the United States." 16 U.S.C. § 808. 



The issue of transfer of American tuna boats to foreign registry has arisen 

 because of regulations adopted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 

 1972 to limit the number of porpoises (marine mammals) that may be taTcen 

 incidental to tuna fishing operations. The Marine Mammal Protection Act 



