9 



also indicates that the material was not redeposited within the 

 Mud Dump Site. How can anybody after they receive that report 

 suggest that capping is going to make the difference? Capping is a 

 joke. 



This morning I received a call from the EPA informing me that 

 they are basing their decision to allow the ocean dumping on the 

 proven stability of capping. They claim the losses of material 

 appear not to affect past mounds but rather areas between them. 

 And let me emphasize that they are basing their decisions on ap- 

 pearances. They don't know for certain if the cap will hold up in 

 the event of significant storm action. They have basically ignored 

 their own report. They have ignored information from the National 

 Weather Service about how we are entering into a 25-year storm 

 cycle. 



What this says to me basically is that the EPA will not take the 

 time to really do its job. I have a reminder for them. Gang, you are 

 in the business of environmental protection. That is what you are 

 supposed to be doing. You are supposed to take as much time as 

 possible to assure the full protection of our resources. You are sup- 

 posed to fully investigate any potential danger to the environment. 

 You are not supposed to base decisions on appearances. You are 

 not entitled to make decisions based on economic considerations. It 

 is the environment that we are talking about here, and I intend 

 every lack of respect for the Federal agencies here today and to the 

 region which has signed off on this permit. 



I demand that you go to the site and come back with proof that 

 the marine life there has not been adversely affected by the con- 

 taminants. I demand that you prove to me that capping will stay in 

 place. Each of the Federal agencies, the Corps, the EPA, the Na- 

 tional Marine Fisheries Service, have made successive capping a 

 contingency of its approval of ocean dumping, and summary think- 

 ing needs to be done in light of this latest report. It is not too late 

 to prevent ocean disposal. What the EPA has erroneously asserted 

 is that capping is OK if you ocean dump. 



Now, I don't have much more to say, Mr. Chairman, but I don't 

 consider myself an unreasonable person, and I think that now is 

 our opportunity to stop ocean dumping. They haven't told me why. 

 Nobody's responded to my request and that of other environmental 

 agencies about in-vessel storage. We put together a proposal, and 

 we have asked that you consider it. Nobody has considered it. 



We know that ocean dumping is the cheapest disposal method 

 known, and that is the reason that this is being done. You don't 

 have to make choices between the economy and the environment. 

 This would have been a case where you could have saved the port 

 and the health of the ocean as well and not sanction the disposal 

 and capping. But instead of looking to new ways of dealing with old 

 problems, they have resorted to the same old maxim — Mr. Saxton 

 said it — out-of-sight, out-of-mind. 



I had a number of people in my office, and it is in my testimony, 

 some from my own district — Max Kline of Matcom Incorporated in 

 Shrewsbury — who came to my office and gave us examples of alter- 

 natives that could have been used, but nobody has been considering 

 them. You know, I see Mr. Davis. I see a lot of people. When I was 

 on Public Works for the last four years, we came up with propos- 



