achieved in planning and coordination is doubtful, owing to the efficacy of the existing ICO system, now in its sixth year of operation. Moreover, the bill raises a general question relating to the structure of the executive branch for dealing with questions of science policy. The Office of Science and Technology was established with the concurrence of the Congress to advise and assist the President on matters relating to science and technology and to coordinate the activities of the Federal agencies. The bill raises in principle the desirability of establishing a series of national councils, for areas of high importance to science and technology, which report directly to the President. This way of organizing to deal with problems of science and technology would raise complicated problems, both for the President and for the major departments. A prerequisite to decisions relating to the future development of oceanography is a thorough analysis of the state of the field, identification of points of priority in terms of science, technology, and resources, and the potential contributions of all parties (industry, government, universities, foundations, and private laboratories) to the field. A study group composed of outstanding scientists is being established under the auspices of the President's Science Advisory Committee to review these questions. They are also under study by the National Academy of Science's Committee on Oceanography. It would seem prudent to withhold judgments on organizational matters until the results of these studies are available. Sincerely yours, Hon. HERBERT C. BONNER, DONALD F. HORNIG, Director. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, Washington, D.C., June 29, 1965. Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, DEAR MR. BONNER: Thank you for your request of May 11, 1965, for the views of the Smithsonian Institution on H.R. 7849, a bill to provide for the development of ocean resources, to provide for economic development of the Continental Shelf, to provide for expanded research in the oceans and the Great Lakes, to establish a National Oceanographic Council, and for other purposes. This legislation, consisting of three titles, is designated the "Ocean Resources Development Act of 1965." Title I of H.R. 7849 sets forth the objectives of the oceanographic and marine science activities of the United States. Title II of this legislation would (1) establish in the Executive Office of the President a National Oceanographic Council composed of representatives of Federal departments and agencies engaged in oceanographic and marine science activities; (2) provide that the Council shall serve as the advisory body of the President concerning the performance of functions in the fields of oceanography and the marine sciences, including certain designated functions; (3) authorize the Council to employ a staff; (4) direct the Council to submit to Congress within 1 year from the enactment of H.R. 7849 a comprehensive legislative program to further oceanography and the marine sciences; (5) authorize the Council, under the foreign policy guidance of the President, to engage in an international cooperative program in these fields; (6) provide for the issuance of an annual report by the President describing and evaluating the activities of the United States in the fields of oceanography and the marine sciences, containing such legislative recommendations as the President may deem necessary; (7) prescribe certain security provisions relating to the Council's employees and activities; and (8) authorize annual appropriations, not exceeding $500,000, to carry out the purposes of H. R. 7849. Title III of H.R. 7849 would (1) establish a Marine Exploration and Development Commission, composed of two private citizens appointed by the President and the Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, and the Interior, to formulate and carry out programs of exploration and development of the marine resources of the Continental Shelf and the water above it, including certain designated programs; (2) grant the Commission authority to employ a staff, to enter into certain cooperative agreements with public and private scientific institutions or with private individuals or enterprises, and to make loans, grants, or other cost-sharing arrangements; (3) establish a marine exploration and development fund to be available to the Commission for making loans, grants, or other cost-sharing arrangements; (4) authorize an annual appropriation not exceeding $50 million to the Commission. to carry out its functions, and a $100 million appropriation into the marine exploration and development fund, to remain available until expended; (5) direct the Commission to the extent found consistent with the national security requirements to make available to the public information obtained in carrying out its functions; and (6) direct the Commission to make an annual report of its activities, including such legislative recommendations as are deemed desirable. It is noted that the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution is included in the membership of the proposed National Oceanographic Council to be established under title II of H.R. 7849. The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution will be asked to consider this legislation as soon as practicable. I shall be pleased to advise you of its views at that time. Sincerely yours, S. DILLON RIPLEY, Secretary. Hon. HERBERT C. BONNER, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Your letter of May 11, 1965, acknowledged on May 14, requested the Department's comments on H.R. 7849, a bill to provide for the development of the Continental Shelf, to provide for expanded research in the oceans and the Great Lakes, to establish a National Oceanographic Council, and for other pruposes. Essentially, the bill combines the features of H.R. 5654 and II.R. 5884 and companion bills). The Department of State is in full agreement with the necessity for joint planning and coordination of the multiple oceanographic activ ities sponsored by the various governmental agencies. Only in this way can an effective, integrated, truly national program be developed. It was for this purpose that the Interagency Committee on Oceanog raphy was established in 1960 by the Federal Council for Science and Technology. Its membership represents the Departments of State, Treasury, Defense, Interior, Commerce, Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Smithsonian Institution, Atomic Energy Commission, and National Science Foundation. This Committee has achieved considerable success in furthering national goals while supporting the missions of the individual agencies. There would be no effect on the conduct of our foreign relations if the proposed Council were substituted for the Interagency Committee, and, therefore, the Department would interpose no objection to the creation of such a Council. However, creation of such a Council would more directly affect the domestic operation oceanographic agencies, and due consideration should be accorded their views on the matter. If the Congress should decide to create the Council, the legislation might create a position of full-time Chairman of the Council to coordinate policy and action and to direct the staff. The Vice President could still be given the responsibility for overseeing and coordinating oceanographic activities within the executive branch in such legislation. but would not, of course, be Chairman of the Council since the Chairman would report to the Federal Council for Science and Technology. This change could be accomplished through minor changes in the bill. The Department does not believe that the proposed Marine Exploration and Development Commission would have any adverse effect on the conduct of our foreign relations, and therefore would interpose no objection to its creation. In fact, the Department believes that the Commission might prove most helpful in the development of oceanic capability and use which would not only provide a source of raw materials for our economy, as contemplated by the bill, but also forestall domination of the ocean by forces inimical to our welfare. The Department is disturbed, however, that the bill is silent on the relationship between the Council and the Commission, should it be decided to create both, or the relationship between the Commission and the existing Government oceanic community should it be decided to create only the Commission. It is suggested that, in the first instance, the Chairman of the Commission should be made a member of the Council. If the suggestion made above regarding a full-time Chairman for the Council is adopted, he might also be the Chairman of the Commission. It should also be made clear that the provisions of section 201(e) apply to the Commission. If the Council is not established, provisions should be inserted in the sections dealing with the Commission requiring cooperation with other Government agencies engaged in oceanic endeavors. The following comments are directed to specific provisions or sections of the bill, should the Congress determine that it should be enacted. 1. Section 102(3): This section defines the term "Continental Shelf" in a somewhat different way from the way the term is defined in the Convention on the Continental Shelf, 1958. Since the rights of the United States derive from the convention, it is our view that any implementing or supporting legislation should conform substantially to the convention. As defined in the convention, the term "Continental Shelf" includes only areas "outside the area of the territorial sea" where the specified depth or exploitability criteria. exists. The term as defined in the bill does not exclude the area of the territorial sea but, on the contrary, would include the territorial sea at least where the depth or exploitability factors are present. The territorial sea, including its seabed and subsoil, is a part of the sovereign territory of the coastal State and rests on different principles of law than those applicable to the Continental Shelf. In the case of the shelf the sovereign rights of the coastal State are confined to the subsoil and seabed, the superjacent waters remaining high seas in which the customary freedom of the seas exists. Finally, not only is the definition of "Continental Shelf" in the bill inconsistent with the definition in the Convention on the Continental Shelf but also with existing U.S. legislation; i.e., the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (Public Law 212, 83d Cong.; 67 Stat 462). However, the Department recognizes the necessity of including in the functions of the proposed Commission responsibility to carry out activities in the area of the submerged lands of the territorial sea similar to those carried out in the area of the Continental Shelf. The Department further recognizes that the functions envisaged for the Commission cannot be carried out completely if limited to the Continental Shelf. The rights of the states under the Submerged Lands Act (Public Law 31, 83d Congress; 67 Stat. 29) must be taken into account, of course. If, as the Department believes, the provisions of the bill should be extended to the territorial sea, it is suggested that this be done by specific mention of the territorial sea and that the definition of the term "Continental Shelf" conform to the definition in article 1 of the Convention on the Continental Shelf. However, in this connection, it is suggested that consideration be given to the question whether the inclusion of the territorial sea in the coverage of the proposed legislation would be consistent with the rights of the States under the Submerged Lands Act (Public Law 31, 83d Congress; 67 Stat. 29), and maybe other laws also. 2. Section 201 (f) and section 301 (c): Section 201 (f) provides that the Executive Secretary of the Council shall receive a rate of compensation not to exceed that of level II of the Federal executive salary schedule, while section 301 (c) provides that the Executive Director of the Commission shall receive compensation at the rate of level IV of the Federal executive salary schedule. The Department calls this difference to the attention of the Congress, which may wish to consider whether an appropriate change should be made in either section 201 (f) or section 301 (c) or both. 3. Section 202(a): The Department believes that section 202(a) is unnecessarily restrictive since it appears to confine international cooperation in oceanography to that formalized by treaties ratified by the President after advice and consent of the Senate. U.S. agencies and institutions are now cooperating with other countries in many valuable oceanographic studies and are contemplating additional programs in the future. All these programs fall within the normal activities of the responsible agencies and are carefully reviewed for foreign policy implications before approval. Ample authority already exists for a large measure of cooperation in international ventures in oceanography. Should this prove inadequate, further authority would be sought through treaty or legislation. Since the present procedure has worked very satisfactorily, no change is believed necessary at present. More formal agreements can be made, of course, for any aspect of the international programs requiring such action. Therefore, if the proposed legislation is enacted, it is suggested that a period be placed after the word "title" in line 25, page 7, of section 202(a) or that the section be deleted. 4. Section 202(c): We suggest, also, the deletion of the words "the Chairman or" from section 202(c). This section implies that the President is required to include in his report to the Congress proposals for additional legislation considered necessary by the Chairman of the Council (whether the Vice President or an independent Chairman) whether or not the President agreed with the proposal. 5. Section 201 (c), section 201(d), and section 301(a): The Department notes that the authority in section 201(d) for members of the Council to designate alternates is with the advice and consent of the Senate, unless at the time of the designation the officer was appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate. Section 301(a), however, permits Government members of the Commission to designate any officer of his department as alternate, without any restriction. The Department suggests that a member of the Council or of the Commission may wish to designate more than one alternate. First, there may be times when both the member and a single alternate would be unable to attend a meeting of the Council or of the Commission. Second, in departments where more than one oceanographic specialty is encountered, it may be desired to have more than one alternate in order that the most appropriate officer may serve as alternate at a particular meeting. Therefore, the Department suggests that the Congress may wish to consider substituting the words "not more than two officers" for the words "another officer" in sections 201(c) and 301(a). Further, the Department does not believe it essential that such alternates be designated with the advice and consent of the Senate. Such a provision is designed to insure that an alternate would be a policy level officer; the Department believes that it is unlikely that members would designate other than policy level officers as alternates. 6. Section 203(a): The Department believes that the word "consulted" in line 3, page 9, should be "consultants." 7. Section 302(3): This section provides, as one of the functions of the proposed Commission, the development of an engineering capability that will permit exploitation and development of the Continental Shelf "and superjacent waters." The waters superjacent to the Continental Shelf, as defined by the convention, are high seas, and while the provision in question is not necessarily inconsistent with that situation, nevertheless, it should be clear that the rights of the coastal state in such waters are not exclusive. The Bureau of the Budget advises that from the standpoint of the administration's program there is no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours, DOUGLAS MACARTHUR II, Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. |