Table reveal that there may be some differences concerning which provisions should be considered basic and how these provisions should be expressed. We hope these can be resolved without too much difficulty. The Subcommittee then can move forward to the specific implementation of the basic provisions, which is in essence the next item in our program of work.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

APPENDIX F

STATEMENT BY DR. VINCENT E. MCKELVEY, DIRECTOR, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

SUBCOMMITTEE I, MARCH 14, 1972

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On March 8, my good friend, the distinguished delegate from Chile, referred to a statement I had made to a Subcommittee of the United States Senate, and asked that we provide this Committee with further information concerning that statement as well as information about the activities of United States firms engaged in deep sea mineral studies. As many of the delegates know, the United States delegation has attempted over the last several years to keep this Committee abreast of developments in sub-sea exploration. Taking into account the Chair's guidance regarding the length of statements, we will be glad to respond to Mr. Zegers' invitation by way of a brief summary of progress in the advance of knowledge and technology concerning deep sea manganese-oxide nodules. Mr. Zegers also referred to legislation introduced in the U.S. Congress regarding interim arrangements for U.S. citizens. May I just say that he was correct in indicating that the Executive Branch has not taken a position on this Bill.

Mr. Chairman, I realize it may be out of the ordinary for a delegate to request a change in the provisional summary record of a statement made by another delegate, but with your permission, I request that the Secretary change my title in the record of Mr. Zegers' statement from Senator to just plain Mr. It is true that I have received a new title since I last appeared before this Committee, but it is one much less illustrious.

The statement to which Mr. Zegers referred actually was presented first to this Committee on March 25, 1971, during our meeting in Geneva. Additional copies will be made available to those interested in the statement itself. In essence, the statement reported that many companies in several countries were actively engaged in one or another aspect of the study of nodule recovery technology and that the results of their investigations indicated that commercial production of nodules would be possible by the end of this decade.

This general conclusion is still valid and is supported by the new developments referred to by Mr. Zegers. The Deep Sea Ventures Company has announced an experiment involving the operation of a small pilot plant at Gloucester, Virginia, and the successful recovery of metals from the nodules on this experimental basis. The Hughes Tool Company is reported to have begun construction of a 35,000 ton prototype mining ship and a barge for special use in ocean mining, and the Kennecott Copper Corporation has announced that it has dredged nodules for metallurgical experiments and that it also has been undertaking studies of mining and processing systems.

Recently, a group of 24 companies from Japan, the United States, Canada, France, West Germany, and Australia are reported to have formed a group to support a program to test next summer the continuous line bucket dredging system, which was first invented by Mr. Masuda, a Japanese engineer. We are not informed of the details of the tests planned, but we understand that they are designed to assess the feasibility of recovering the sea floor nodules from the Pacific in water depth of up to 15,000 feet and to recover small tonnages for use in metallurgical experiments. We understand further that the group's only purpose is to support these tests and share in the technology developed. The arrangements do not provide for continuation of the group after the experiment has been concluded. It was not formed, in other words, as a commercial mining enterprise.

In addition to the companies participating in the continuous line bucket dredge experiment, and in addition to those I mentioned earlier, six other European and Japanese companies are reported to be studying manganse-oxide nodule technology.

Details of these various studies have not been made available to us, but the announcements already referred to make it clear that the investigations have

contributed much to the development of knowledge about the distribution of manganese-oxide nodules and the means for their commercial recovery.

With respect to the distribution of nodules on the sea floor, the information available is sufficient to show that they are widely distributed, particularly on parts of the deep ocean floor in the Pacific. The maps to which the distinguished representative of Chile referred were ones that my colleagues and I prepared for the use of this Committee in 1969, and distributed to the members at that time. I am pleased to report now that Dr. Maurice Ewing, Dr. Horn, and other scientists at the Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory recently published two new sets of maps showing the world distribution of nodules. One set shows the localities at which photographs have been obtained of the sea bottom and indicates the observed density of the nodules at those points. The other set shows the localities at which nodules have been found by bottom sampling. A set of these maps is being distributed today to each of the delegations. Incidentally. Mr. Chairman, these maps were presented at a conference on manganese nodule geology and technology held by Lamont in January. This was an open conference, publicized worldwide, and attended by participants from many countries. The sea floor exploration already undertaken has also served to define better the physical character of the sea bottom and hence to define the conditions that need to be taken into account in the design of mining equipment. Progress in the development of mining systems to collect and lift the nodules to the surface has also been substantial. The problem of recovering metal from the nodules, once considered nearly insoluble, has also yielded under research and technological development to the point where metal recovery now promises to be economically feasible.

Mr. Chairman, minerals and rocks that cannot be utilized for human purposes are of no benefit to mankind. The minerals on the deep ocean floor are still in this category in spite of the progress I have described, for they cannot yet be produced economically. But in the progress made in determining their geological character and distribution, and in learning how to mine and process them, we can see the clear prospect that they will be exploitable within the decade. When exploitation does become feasible, significant new resources will come within the reach of mankind to help satisfy the growing world demand for resources, to produce revenues for the international community, and in other ways to bene fit all mankind. And in this progress, Mr. Chairman, we can also see the great importance and the future value of our work in establishing an international regime that will permit the orderly, efficient, wise, and equitable development of these resources.

Thank you, Sir.

APPENDIX G

STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE JOHN R. STEVENSON, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE PEACEFUL USES OF THE SEABED AND THE OCEAN FLOOR BEYOND THE LIMITS OF NATIONAL JURISDICTION

SUBCOMMITTEE I-MARCH 21, 1972

Item 2: Status, Scope, Functions and Powers of the International Machinery. Mr. Chairman, I will limit my remarks to a brief outline of views on certain major issues raised by the sub-items of this item our program of work. I will not repeat points made in earlier statements.

A. Organs of the International Machinery, Including Composition, Procedures and Dispute Settlement

We have proposed machinery consisting of three principal organs: an Assembly composed of representatives of all parties to the Treaty, a Council of 24 members, and a Tribunal.

If the machinery, and in particular the Council, is to have significant regulatory powers, then its composition and procedures must insure adequate protection for those States whose activities will be most significantly affected by its action. We have proposed that the Council be composed of 18 elected members and the six most industrially advanced states, and that its regulatory decisions be based upon a majority of each group. While the specific details regarding the structure of the Council clearly require further discussion, it is essential to preserve the underlying principle that there be a broad spectrum of support for decisions. Certain decisions of the Council should be subject to review and approval by the Assembly. We have proposed such authority for the Assembly over the budget and the allocation of revenues.

We believe it is of critical importance that the regime contemplated in the Principles provide for peaceful and compulsory settlement of disputes. We know from experience with resource exploitation on land that disputes are likely to occur. They should not be allowed to become burdens on the political relations between States. We have proposed a special tribunal to settle disputes under the treaty regime because it would encourage the development of a body of expertise in interpreting provisions of the regime. We have also provided for referral from the tribunal to the International Court of Justice of general questions of international law.

The U.S. Draft also includes provision for three specialized commissions. B. Rules and Practices Relating to Activities for the Exploration, Exploitation and Management of the Resources of the Area, as well as those Relating to the Preservation of the Marine Environment and Scientific Research Including Technical Assistance to Developing Countries

With respect to sub-item B, we have proposed different solutions for the intermediate zone and for the fully international area seaward of the intermediate

zone.

Within the intermediate zone, compliance with certain general international standards derived from the Principles would be mandatory and subject to the juridical authority of the Tribunal. In addition, certain regulations promulgated by the Council would constitute minimum standards applicable within the intermediate zone, although the coastal State could apply higher standards. Two examples of a clear international interest in the application of such minimum standards would be protection of the marine environment from pollution arising from seabed activities and prevention of unjustifiable interference with other uses such as navigation in the superjacent waters. It would also be appropriate for the Council to establish accounting and other procedures regarding agreed revenue sharing from the intermediate zone.

The United States draft treaty included certain appendices containing rules regarding resource management within the intermediate zone, and contemplated that the International Authority could issue additional regulations in this regard. A number of States have commented that this aspect of the U.S. proposalwhich some have characterized as mining code provisions- unnecessarily prejudged the type of resource management system that a coastal state might choose for the intermediate zone off its coast, and that inclusion of such provisions was unnecessary to achieve the basic balance of coastal and international interests inherent in the intermediate zone concept and to protect other uses such as navigation. Accordingly, we have concluded that incorporation of these resource management provisions may be unnecessary, and there could be fuller reliance on coastal State machinery in this regard.

In the area seaward of the intermediate zone, we believe the general parameters of the exploration and exploitation system should be specified in the treaty or, as we have done, in an appendix to the treaty. These should be specific enough to provide the degree of certainty and predictability necessary to insure ratification, and flexible enough to insure that the international system can adapt to developing technology and changing conditions. Thus, relying in part on the precedent of the ICAO Convention, we propose a system whereby rules and recommended practices regarding exploration and exploitation can be promulgated within the parameters fixed by the Treaty. These would be prepared by the Rules and Recommended Practices Commission in the light of comments received from member states. The drafts would be forwarded to the Council and, if approved. would enter into force unless one-third of the contracting parties objected within a fixed period of time.

For reasons we have discussed in our earlier statements, we have proposed a licensing system for exploration and exploitation. Licenses would be issued to the private or state entity or group of States actually engaged in exploration or exploitation, provided that a state party assumes responsibility as a "sponsor" for supervising the licensee. Details of the licensing terms would be determined in accordance with the objectives of promoting development and maximizing the benefits to the international community, and of course encouraging the necessary investment to achieve these objectives.

Needless to say, we would contemplate that among the rules and recommended practices issued by the Authority would be those designed to insure that exploration and exploitation are conducted with strict and adequate safeguards for the protection of human life and safety and of the marine environment. Moreover, because of the environmental implications of deep drilling, we have proposed that deep drilling conducted for purposes other than exploration or exploitation, such as scientific research, be subject to the requirement of obtaining a permit issued by the Authority.

The Operations Commission would be responsible for issuing and administering both exploration and exploitation licenses and deep drilling permits.

We believe the international machinery can play an important role in promot ing international cooperation in scientific research, distribution of scientific information, and the development of measures to strengthen research capabilities of developing countries. One of the functions assigned to the Secretariat in Article 62 of our draft is the collection, publication and dissemination of information which will contribute to mankind's knowledge of seabed resources.

Article 41 of the U.S. draft provides that the Council of the Authority may, at the request of any party and taking into account the special needs of developing countries, provide technical assistance to further the objectives of the convention. C. The Equitable Sharing in the Benefits to be Derived from the Area, Bearing in Mind the Special Interests and Needs of Developing Countries, whether Coastal or Land-locked

The provisions I have just referred to regarding technical assistance are obviously one aspect of the broader question of equitable sharing of benefits.

The licensing and revenue system we have proposed for the fully international area seaward of the intermediate zone would result in the collection of revenues from licensees in much the same way as is currently the case on land, except that the Authority would receive the payments. Moreover, we believe there cannot be a truly equitable system of benefit sharing unless there is also some provision for revenue sharing from important areas of the continental margin that contain valuable petroleum and gas deposits that are likely to be exploited in the near future. Accordingly, we have proposed that a portion of the revenue derived