Exploitation of the mineral resources of the sea is a matter of concern for all states and their citizens. Exploitation of resources located in the Seabed Area is a matter of the requirements of the UNCLOS, which must be observed by its all member states. However, some provisions of the UNCLOS have general and ambiguous requirements for member states to support the performance of contractors in the Seabed Area. In this regard, states parties to the UNCLOS are concerned that, by supporting the economic activity of contractors in the Seabed Area, the obligation to compensate them for their damaging actions may not be incurred. Because these states are not in charge of exploiting the mineral resources of the Seabed Area. It is obvious that their economic income is small due to the support of the applicant contractors. Resolving the ambiguity of this concern is the issue of advisory opinion that has been requested from Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal Law of the Sea to interpret the provisions of the UNCLOS. Judges of the Seabed Disputes Chamber interpret the main concepts set forth in chapters 11 and 12 of the UNCLOS, including due diligence, obligation to ensure, and obligation to achieve, argued that the sponsor state's obligations to the sponsored contractor’s activities is obligation to ensure. The sponsor state advocating for the contractor to comply with the provisions of the UNCLOS and the contracting parties, use appropriate instruments and endeavor to achieve maximum results and achieve these goals. Under these conditions, the responsibility for the damage by sponsored contractor to the Area environment is not borne to state. This approach means that compensation for the damage to the marine environment remains unresolved or that it is compensated by the fund at the expense of the UNCLOS’s all states parties.