IV 
115TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. RES. 339 
Calling upon the United States Senate to give its advice and consent to 
the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 18, 2017 
Mr. COURTNEY (for himself, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Ms. BORDALLO, Mrs. 
DAVIS of California, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. GALLEGO, Mr. 
SMITH of Washington, Mr. GARAMENDI, and Mr. LANGEVIN) submitted 
the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs 
RESOLUTION 
Calling upon the United States Senate to give its advice 
and consent to the ratification of the United Nations 
Convention on the Law of the Sea. 
Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Law of the 
Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted by Third United Nations 
Conference on the Law of the Sea in December 1982, 
and entered into force in November 1994 to establish a 
treaty regime to govern activities on, over, and under the 
world’s oceans; 
Whereas UNCLOS builds on four 1958 law of the sea con-
ventions to which the United States is a party, including 
the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous 
Zone, the Convention on the High Seas, the Convention 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
on the Continental Shelf, and the Convention on Fishing 
and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High 
Seas; 
Whereas the treaty and an associated 1994 agreement relat-
ing to implementation of the treaty were transmitted to 
the Senate on October 6, 1994, and, in the absence of 
Senate advice and consent to adherence, the United 
States is not a party to the convention and the associated 
1994 agreement; 
Whereas the convention has been ratified by 167 parties, 
which includes 166 states and the European Union, but 
not the United States; 
Whereas the United States, like most other countries, believes 
that coastal states under UNCLOS have the right to reg-
ulate economic activities in their Exclusive Economic 
Zones (EEZs), but do not have the right to regulate for-
eign military activities in their EEZs; 
Whereas the treaty’s provisions relating to navigational 
rights, including those in EEZs, reflect the United States 
diplomatic position on the issue dating back to 
UNCLOS’s adoption in 1982; 
Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would reinforce the 
United States perspective into permanent international 
law; 
Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would give the 
United States standing to participate in discussions relat-
ing to the treaty and thereby improve the United States 
ability to intervene as a full party to disputes relating to 
navigational rights, and to defend United States interpre-
tations of the treaty’s provisions, including those relating 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
to whether coastal states have a right under UNCLOS to 
regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs; 
Whereas relying on customary international norms to defend 
United States interests in these issues is not sufficient, 
because it is not universally accepted and is subject to 
change over time based on state practice; 
Whereas relying on other nations to assert claims on behalf 
of the United States at the Hague Convention is woefully 
insufficient to defend and uphold United States sovereign 
rights and interests; 
Whereas the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in their July 
12, 2016, ruling on the case In the Matter of the South 
China Sea Arbitration, stated, ‘‘the Tribunal forwarded 
to the Parties for their comment a Note Verbale from the 
Embassy of the United States of America, requesting to 
send a representative to observe the hearing’’ and ‘‘the 
Tribunal communicated to the Parties and the U.S. Em-
bassy that it had decided that ‘‘only interested States 
parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of 
the Sea will be admitted as observers’’ and thus could not 
accede to the U.S. request.’’; 
Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jona-
than Greenert, stated ‘‘as a party to UNCLOS, we will 
be in a better position to counter the efforts of coastal 
nations to restrict freedom of the seas’’ on February 16, 
2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray 
Mabus, stated, ‘‘the UNCLOS treaty guarantees rights 
such as innocent passage through territorial seas; transit 
passage through, under and over international straits; 
and the laying and maintaining of submarine cables’’, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
and, ‘‘the convention has been approved by nearly every 
maritime power and all the permanent members of the 
UN Security Council, except the United States’’, on Feb-
ruary 16, 2012, before the Senate Armed Services Com-
mittee; 
Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray 
Mabus, further stated, ‘‘Our notable absence as a signa-
tory weakens our position with other nations, allowing 
the introduction of expansive definitions of sovereignty on 
the high seas that undermine our ability to defend our 
mineral rights along our own continental shelf and in the 
Arctic’’, and, ‘‘the Department strongly supports the ac-
cession to UNCLOS, an action consistently recommended 
by my predecessors of both parties’’, on February 16, 
2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the President and the Chief Executive Officer of the 
United States Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Thomas J. 
Donahue, stated, ‘‘we support joining the Convention be-
cause it is in our national interest—both in our national 
security and our economic interests’’, and, ‘‘becoming a 
party to the Treaty benefits the U.S. economically by 
providing American companies the legal certainty and 
stability they need to hire and invest’’, and, ‘‘companies 
will be hesitant to take on the investment risk and cost 
to explore and develop the resources of the sea—particu-
larly on the extended continental shelf (ECS)—without 
the legal certainty and stability accession to LOS pro-
vides’’, on June 28, 2012, before the Senate Committee 
on Foreign Relations; 
Whereas the President and the Chief Executive Officer of the 
United States Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Thomas J. 
Donahue, further stated, ‘‘the benefits of joining cut 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
across many important industries including telecommuni-
cations, mining, shipping, and oil and natural gas’’, and, 
‘‘joining the Convention will provide the U.S. a critical 
voice on maritime issues—from mineral claims in the 
Arctic to how International Seabed Authority (ISA) 
funds are distributed’’, on June 28, 2012, before the 
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; 
Whereas the past Commander of United States Pacific Com-
mand, Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, stated that 
UNCLOS is ‘‘widely accepted after a lot of years of de-
liberation by many, many countries, most countries in my 
Area of Responsibility (AOR)’’, and, ‘‘when we’re not a 
signatory, it reduces our overall credibility when we bring 
it up as a choice of how you might solve a dispute of any 
kind’’, on April 16, 2015, before the Senate Armed Serv-
ices Committee; 
Whereas the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, 
Admiral Paul Zukunft, stated on February 12, 2016, 
state that ‘‘With the receding of the icepack, the Arctic 
Ocean has become the focus of international interest’’, 
and ‘‘All Arctic states agree that the Law of the Sea 
Convention is the governing legal regime for the Arctic 
Ocean . . . yet, we remain the only Arctic nation that 
has not ratified the very instrument that provides this ac-
cepted legal framework governing the Arctic Ocean and 
its seabed’’, and ‘‘Ratification of the Law of the Sea Con-
vention supports our economic interests, environmental 
protection, and safety of life at sea, especially in the Arc-
tic Ocean’’; 
Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jona-
than Greenert, further stated, ‘‘remaining outside Law of 
the Sea Convention (LOSC) is inconsistent with our prin-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
ciples, our national security strategy and our leadership 
in commerce and trade’’, and, ‘‘virtually every major ally 
of the U.S. is a party to LOSC, as are all other perma-
nent members of the U.N. Security Council and all other 
Arctic nations’’, on June 14, 2012, before the Senate 
Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jona-
than Greenert, further stated, ‘‘our absence [from LOSC] 
could provide an excuse for nations to selectively choose 
among Convention provisions or abandon it altogether, 
thereby eroding the navigational freedoms we enjoy 
today’’, and, ‘‘accession would enhance multilateral oper-
ations with our partners and demonstrate a clear com-
mitment to the rule of law for the oceans’’, on June 14, 
2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the United States Special Representative of State 
for the Arctic and former Commandant of the Coast 
Guard, Admiral Robert Papp, Jr., stated, ‘‘as a non- 
party to the Law of the Sea Convention, the U.S. is at 
a significant disadvantage relative to the other Arctic 
Ocean coastal States’’, and, ‘‘those States are parties to 
the Convention, and are well along the path to obtaining 
legal certainty and international recognition of their Arc-
tic extended continental shelf’’, and, ‘‘becoming a Party 
to the Law of the Sea Convention would allow the United 
States to fully secure its rights to the continental shelf 
off the coast of Alaska, which is likely to extend out to 
more than 600 nautical miles’’, on December 10, 2014, 
before the House Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and 
Emerging Threats of the Foreign Affairs Committee; 
Whereas the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, General 
Joseph F. Dunford, stated, ‘‘The Convention provides 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339
•HRES 339 IH 
legal certainty in the world’s largest maneuver space’’, 
and, ‘‘access would strengthen the legal foundation for 
our ability to transit through international straits and 
archipelagic waters; preserve our right to conduct mili-
tary activities in other countries’ Exclusive Economic 
Zones (EEZs) without notice or permission; reaffirm the 
sovereign immunity of warships; provide a framework to 
counter excessive maritime claims; and preserve or oper-
ations and intelligence-collection activities’’, and, ‘‘joining 
the Convention would also demonstrate our commitment 
to the rule of law, strengthen our credibility among those 
nations that are already party to the Convention, and 
allow us to bring the full force of our influence in chal-
lenging excessive maritime claims’’, on July 9, 2015, be-
fore the Senate Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, General 
Joseph F. Dunford, further stated, ‘‘by remaining outside 
the Convention, the United States remains in scarce com-
pany with Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Syria’’, 
and, ‘‘by failing to join the Convention, some countries 
may come to doubt our commitment to act in accordance 
with international law’’, on July 9, 2015, before the Sen-
ate Armed Services Committee; 
Whereas the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. 
Richardson, stated, ‘‘acceding to the Convention would 
strengthen our credibility and strategic position’’, and, 
‘‘we undermine our leverage by not signing up to the 
same rule book by which we are asking other countries 
to accept’’, on July 30, 2015, before the Senate Armed 
Services Committee; 
Whereas the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. 
Richardson, further stated, ‘‘that becoming a part of 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:21 May 19, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR339.IH
HR339