3A0 



1 ROBERT I. THIEME 



2 report and, as I say, was reaffirtned in slightly different 



3 wording in the presentation made by Mr. Kari. 



4 Even more important, however, is the lack 



5 of an analysis of the benefits to Puget Sound waters 



g which can be expected from the enormous expenditures which 



m would be necessary to meet the proposed requirements. In 



g our considered opinion, the adoption of the measures 



Q recommended by the report would result in no significant 

 change in the quality of Puget Sound waters. While there 



10 



,, may be localized problems which can be alleviated, this 



12 

 13 



14 



16 

 17 



18 



can be accomplished without the adoption of the stringent 

 requirements recommended by the report. We believe that 

 the failure to discuss the cost-benefit relationship of 



ig the proposed recommendations is a serious shortcoming in 



the report. 



Turning to our specific situation, I believe 

 I would like to discuss a moment the procedures that were 



19 followed in connection with the Delaware River studies. 



20 I have a chart here which I think rather dramatically 



21 demonstrates what the situation is in terms of cost-benefit 



22 relationship. This is the result of a very extensive, 



23 sophisticated and detailed study in the Delaware River 



24 complex. You will find a copy of this attached to your 



25 report. 



