11 



Mr. Hughes. Yes. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I particularly want to thank you, Mr. 

 Chairman, and the Chairman of the Environment and Natural Re- 

 sources Committee for this joint hearing today. It is very timely 

 and I appreciate your giving us this opportunity. 



Mr. Chairman, I have a statement which I would like to submit 

 for the record, I think to avoid duplication, because much of what I 

 would have said has already been said by our Senator and will be 

 said by Senator Bradley in his statement, I will summarize, if I 

 may, and then try to respond to some questions. 



You and I have worked together for a long time, as well as my 

 colleague from New Jersey Jim Saxton. We fought a lot of battles 

 trying to develop ocean policy. 



Unfortunately, as I have said from time to time, fish don't have 

 a constituency. That is why it has been so difficult developing 

 ocean policy over the years. Also there is a certain amount of fear. 

 There was a certain amount of fear, if the gentleman from Texas 

 will remember, about our ocean dumping initiatives as well. 



We were waiting for a perfect solution, including development of 

 land-based alternatives. There is a certain amount of fear out there 

 that we are going to do something that will be unfair to some 

 States, something that will create additional costs. I would like to 

 address some of those issues if I may. 



We are talking about developing uniform standards. It shouldn't 

 matter whether you swim in California or in New Jersey, either 

 the waters are swimmable or they are not. They are either safe for 

 the bathing public or they are not safe. If we can agree that the 

 public has a right to know whether waters are polluted, I think we 

 have crossed the threshold. 



I would hope that every Member of this Committee will agree 

 that the public does have a right to know if waters are swimmable 

 and whether they and their children are at risk if they use those 

 waters. That is, I think, the first premise of this particular legisla- 

 tion. 



The second premise is that we can utilize the best science we can 

 muster. Now, EPA is going to tell us once again today that, well, 

 we haven't really found the right science, the right standard. Well, 

 they already have. Enterococci is the standard they have devel- 

 oped. 



Eight States have accepted that standard to date, Delaware being 

 one of them. Most of the States have not accepted. 



Some States utilize the fecal coliform standard. Some use the 

 total coliform standard. Some use a combination of both. Look, we 

 can do better than that. We should be developing the best science, 

 the best standard that we can develop and apply that standard in 

 determining whether or not waters are safe for recreational pur- 

 poses. 



Finally, we should be able to agree upon how often we should 

 test. Developing testing protocols has to be an essential part of any 

 overall standard. 



Now, there has been some concern in the past, about the effects 

 of this bill upon States that have long shorelines such as Texas, 

 California, and Florida. Some States have beaches that have hun- 



