389 



ROGER TOLLEFSON 

 seeing if it is at all possible to do it. But what I 

 am getting to you is that the first question-- 



MR. TOLLEFSON: I think certainly this 

 points up the question that was raised earlier by both, 

 let's see, I believe Mr. Thieme and Mr. Julson in terms 

 of the economic aspects here. Whether or not any sludge 

 beds should be removed, in my opinion, assuming at the 

 moment it is technologically possible, would be a func- 

 tion of the cost of that as against the benefit. This is 

 lacking in this present Federal report before us. We 

 do not--at least I do not find it there. 



CHAIRMAN STEIN: No, I don't think it is 

 there. And I think Mr. Thieme brought this out, the 

 Delaware group did this. I think in the answer to the 

 question to Mr. Harris, they came to a judgment that may 

 have baen related to cost-benefit or it may have been an 

 exercise. But I think the issue of cost-benefit ratio 

 has been considered in various fields, including water 

 pollution control. It has never been incorporated in 

 Federal or, as far as I know, State legislation. 



Now, you can think whatever you want about 

 cost-benefit ratio, but dependent upon the assumptions 

 you use and the formula you use, you may achieve a wide 



range of results or move from one end of the spectrum to 



