208 



contained in the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries 

 Act. For Corps dredging projects in order to determine whether a 

 disposal option is "cost effective," the Corps analyses costs and 

 benefits of all options, both monetary and non-monetary, to 

 include environmental guality improvements, and compares them. 

 Where there are incremental costs between alternatives, the 

 incremental benefits are compared with the incremental costs and 

 a judgment reached on whether the additional expenditure is 

 justified. For dredging activities regulated by the Corps, a 

 determination must be made that the disposal option represents 

 the least environmentally practicable alternative. In making a 

 determination of practicability, the Corps must consider the cost 

 of disposal options. 



- How strongly were these factors considered in the New 

 York/New Jersey permitting process? 



ANSWER Mr. Rees: The New York District evaluated all of the 

 relevant issues and public interest factors which were raised 

 during the public comment period for the application. This 

 included comments received in response to the five public notices 

 issued for the project and those received at the public hearing. 

 Costs were considered insofar as they would affect the 

 opportunity for implementation of alternatives to ocean disposal. 

 Potential environmental impacts were evaluated for the project 

 both at the dredging site and at the ocean disposal site. The 

 District's decision documentation for the project contains 



24 



