A/RDS/3029 (XXVII)

Page

1.

Requests the Secretary-General to prepare, on the basis of data and information at his disposal, a comparative study of the extent and the economic significance, in terms of resources, of the international area that would result from each of the various proposals on limits of national jurisdiction submitted so far to the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction;

2. Further requests the Secretary-General to submit his study as soon as possible, but no later than the opening date of the summer session of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction in 1973;

3.

Invites States, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the specialized agencies and other competent organizations of the United Nations system to co-operate with the Secretary-General in the preparation of such a study;

Declares that nothing in the present resolution or in the study shall prejudice the position of any State concerning limits. the nature of the régio and raskinery or any other matter to be discussed at the forthcoming United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.

211th plenamy macting

18 December 1972

The General Assembly,

Convinced of the importance to coastal States, for purposes of economic development and social progress, of the ocean resources adjacent to their coasts, 1. Requests the Secretary-General to prepare, on the basis of the information at his disposal and in connexion with the study to be submitted pursuant to resolution B above, a comparative study of the potential economic significance for riparian States, in terms of resources, of each of the various proposals on limits of national jurisdiction presented so far to the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction;

2. Further requests the Secretary-General to submit his study as soon as possible, but no later than the opening date of the summer session of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of Sational Jurisdiction in 1973, simultaneously with the study to be prepared under resolution £ above;

3. Declares that nothing in the present resolution or in the study shall prejudice the position of any State concerning limits, the nature of the régime and nachinery or any other matter to be discussed at the forthcoming United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.

2114th plenary meeting 18 December 1972

Senator METCALF. An identical companion measure in the other body is H.R. 9, introduced on January 3, by Mr. Downing, for himself, Mr. Mailliard, Mr. Ruppe, Mr. Goodling, Mr. Bray, Mr. Stubblefield, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, and Mr. Anderson of California. H.R. 9 was the subject of hearings by the Subcommittee on Oceanography, House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, earlier this year.

S. 1134 and H.R. 9 are successors to S. 2801, introduced on November 2, 1971. S. 2801 died with the 92d Congress after time limitations permitted only brief exposure. This Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials and Fuels was able to hold only 1 day of hearings on S. 2801, on June 2, 1972. The hearings, printed under the title of the "Development of Hard Mineral Resources of the Deep Seabed," were devoted primarily to explanation of the bill and testimony on its behalf by spokesmen for industry who drafted the legislation.

I see no need to repeat what is already in the record concerning this legislation. My remarks upon introduction of S. 1134 appear at page S-4147 of the Congressional Record of March 8, 1973, those upon introduction of S. 2801 at pages S-17491-94 of the Record of November 2, 1971. The files of this subcommittee include hearings by the Special Subcommittee on the Outer Continental Shelf which go back to 1969, and hearings in the other body.

At the outset, however, I would like to put these hearings, and the consideration of this legislation, into perspective by mentioning for emphasis a few pertinent facts relating to S. 1134.

As anyone sincerely concerned with this subject is aware, the United States is deeply involved at the United Nations in efforts to reach international agreement on the law of the sea. We in Congress have been warned that passage of legislation such as S. 1134 could adversely affect progress toward international agreement. Some have gone so far as to predict that passage of such legislation would torpedo the Law of the Sea Conference now scheduled for next year in Chile.

While we do not wish to hinder progress toward this vital agreement, I feel that we cannot shy from our responsibilities on the fragile hope that international agreement will come in the near future. Nor, based upon our close observation of the international negotiations to date, have we any assurance that out of the Law of the Sea Conference will come a treaty which the Senate of the United States will vote to ratify. Thus we need a complete and thorough review of the progress or lack of it-toward international agreement and an accurate estimate of the possibility of a successful and timely conclusion of the Law of the Sea negotiations.

Deep seabed mining technology is advancing. It moves forward regardless of what goes on in the United Nations or in the Halls of Congress. On the basis of information available to this committee, the mining of manganese nodules on the deep seabed is closer to being economically feasible than was anticipated when the Senate Subcommittee on the Outer Continental Shelf began hearings in 1969. While it may be ideal to commence mining the deep seabed

under the auspices of an international regime, we in Congress cannot responsibly ignore the need for legislation regulating deep seabed mining in the absence of international agreement.

If it will take years to achieve international agreement, I feel deeply that it is the responsibility of those few governments whose nationals have the money, technology and the will to mine the deep seabed to control in an orderly and legally prescribed manner that exploration and development which either precedes international agreement or occurs between the time a treaty is drafted and comes into force-which could be a period of several years. To me, this is infinitely preferable to exploration and exploitation without any controls. Ours is the responsibility for regulating exploration and development by our nationals.

Among other things, such regulation is necessary to insure competition and thereby prevent monopoly. We are or should be aware that under present international law, industry has the right to mine the minerals of the deep ocean floor. Thus among the questions before us are: Should such rights be regulated, and if so, how?

Finally, I emphasize that my sponsorship of S. 1134 does not imply my support of all of its provisions. The predecessor bill grew out of the appearance by representatives of the American Mining Congress before my special subcommittee on the Outer Continental Shelf in September of 1970. At that time, as our hearing records will show, I told industry witnesses that I would introduce their proposals for circulation and discussion.

That was my position when I introduced S. 2801. It is my position today. I am not committed to this particular bill nor to any part of it. But I, and the members of this subcommittee are ready to be convinced. The purpose of the hearings which we begin today is to expose this bill to the full debate which is needed to assess its strengths and its weaknesses.

It may be that during these hearings we will be persuaded it would be premature to pass this legislation; that its passage would damage the chances of obtaining an early and satisfactory international seabed treaty.

It may become apparent that an international seabed agreement is not likely to be forthcoming and that there is no responsible alternative to passing interim deep ocean mining legislation.

We may conclude that interim legislation is desirable but in an entirely different form than S. 1134.

Whatever may be the result, it is clear to me that Congress would be shirking its duty if we do not give this legislation a fair hearing. It is time the whole matter was thoroughly aired and it is my hope that these hearings will do so.

Today we have with us representatives of the mining industry. They will testify for their bill and answer our questions about it. In subsequent meetings we will hear from representatives of the U.S. Government and other parties interested in this subject.

On June 14, we will hear a report from representatives of the executive department on progress toward international agreement in the United Nations. On June 18th and 19th, spokesmen for environ

mental and international groups will each have one day before us. We will then recess these hearings until mid-September, when executive department witnesses will discuss with us the progress made toward international agreement on the law of the sea at United Nations meetings in Geneva from July 2 through August 24. At that time, we will also have the benefit of the advice of Interior Committee staff members who will be observing the U.N. seabeds committee meetings this summer.

At the conclusion of these hearings we will be in a position to pass judgment on the wisdom of this bill, its content and its urgency.

We have a vote underway. I will call a recess at this time. I will be back as soon as I can. At that time, we will hear the panel without interruption. Thank you very much.

[A recess was taken.]

Senator METCALF. The committee will resume.

We have before us at this time some of our old friends, some of the experts on deep seabed mining. I am going to ask you to come forward as a panel; present your statements and then, I will have some questions. And if somebody else comes in, they could ask the questions of you.

Mr. T. S. Ary, who is vice president of Union Carbide Exploration Co., has appeared before us--the Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials and Fuels for hearings on the Outer Continental Shelf in September 1970. At that time, he suggested several changes to the draft seabed treaty, among the more interesting was to substantially shorten the time limit for partial relinquishment of the lease from 15 to 4 years. Mr. Ary favored interim legislation that would encourage investment and provide security of tenure. He proposed Uncle Sam pay the difference in cost for leases, royalties, et cetera, under an interim arrangement and under an international regime.

We have also Mr. C. H. Burgess, vice president of Exploration, Kennecott Copper. He appeared before the subcommittee during the same hearings. He advocated the establishment of a precise boundary of the continental shelf and the formulation of rules to encourage and regulate ocean exploration and mining.

Mr. Marne Dubs, of the ocean resources department, Kennecott, appeared before the House Subcommittee on Oceanography recently for hearings on H.R. 9. Mr. Dubs strongly supported H.R. 9 and rejected State Department arguments that H.R. 9 is unilateral and preempts the law of the sea conference.

We are delighted to have all of you here to testify on behalf of this bill. Let me repeat, I feel legislation is significant and important. I repeat that I am not wedded to any part of this bill or any other bill. But since yours is the only suggestion we have before us for control of this most important and significant development-as far as the United States is concerned-I would be derelict if I did not say that I feel that we would be destroying some technology and information that we have if we allow other nations to creep up on us without taking advantage of our lead time in this technology.

Now, Mr. Ary, are you going to start off? You will call your colleagues and you are on your own.

STATEMENT OF T. S. ARY, VICE PRESIDENT OF UNION CARBIDE EXPLORATION CORP.

Mr. ARY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My name is T. S. Ary, I am vice president of Union Carbide Exploration Corp. I am here as a representative of the American Mining Congress in my capacity as chairman of the ad hoc committee on undersea mineral resources. The American Mining Congress is a trade association composed of U.S. companies that produce most of the Nation's metals, coal, and industrial and agricultural minerals. It also represents more than 220 companies that manufacture mining and milling equipment and supplies, and commercial banks and other institutions servicing the mineral industry and the financial community.

The American Mining Congress appreciates very much the opportunity to appear before the committee to present testimony on S. 1134, referred to as the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act.

We would like to emphasize that in our statements today that we are addressing ourselves only to the hard minerals area of the mining industry.

Mr. Chairman, for the past 6 or 7 years the American Mining Congress committee has appeared many times before the Senate and House committees relative to our interest in the deep seabed mineral resources and during those appearances we have also responded to the many requests of the Administration with respect to the same subject. Today we would prefer to deviate from past appearances and come before your committee as a panel to summarize various points of interest and be available as a panel to answer or try to answer any questions your committee may desire to ask.

Senator METCALF. Thank you, Mr. Ary. We have a hearing record of the previous appearances, and I hope that you will supplement and add to that record, rather than just repeating it.

Mr. ARY. Well, in that line, rather than to rehash a lot of the old statements before the subcommittees we would like to refer the committee back to those and we would also like to submit some additional statements, and have them given at other locations that we feel are pertinent to the bill: A letter from the American Mining Congress to Mr. Robert White, administrator of NOAA, April 12, 1972; a speech to the Wyoming Mining Association at Jackson Hole; a letter to Hollis Dole relative to a statement of the American Mining Congress of the Draft United Nations Convention, January 27, 1971; and a panel discussion of the Marine Technical Society meeting in Washington; and the statement that we prepared for this particular hearing.

Also, a statement that is not complete-"undersea minerals"which was farmed out to our committee. We have completed the copper, cobalt, nickel section. We have not completed the manganese section. We would like to be able to send that to you by letter at a later date. We were unable to finish that portion of it.

Senator METCALF. Your statement and the other statements that you wish to present will be incorporated into the hearing record at the