254 



12. You mention that misguided public perception has driven certain 

 policy decisions in the permit process. What can the Federal and State 

 agencies, and port communities like yourself, do to educate the public 

 and thus provide for a more rational atmosphere for making policy 

 decisions? 



We believe misguided public perception drives policy 

 decisions in the permit process. For example, the material that we 

 propose to dredge is already in the ecosystem. The proposal, as per 

 the permit that was rescinded, provides for capping of the dredged 

 material. This action would remove the contaminated sediment from the 

 system and render it harmless. We believe that most people would 

 understand this and see the environmental benefit derived from the 

 proposed dredging and disposal. The Port Authority is committed to 

 working with both federal and state agencies and the environmental 

 community to develop a better understanding of the issues and find 

 publicly acceptable solutions which are economically viable for 

 disposal of legally contaminated dredged material. 



13. Can you comme 

 move the entire p 



be un 

 exped 

 at th 

 dredg 

 shift 

 elimi 

 not i 

 exper 

 shoul 



In prin 

 der the EPA. 

 ite the proc 

 e headquarte 

 ed sediments 

 in responsi 

 nating the d 

 mprove the p 

 ienced. Cha 

 d make a dif 



Having 

 Jersey does have 

 Region II . It is 

 ocean disposal of 

 federal criteria . 



nt on the Envir 

 ermitting proce 



ciple, we have 



In fact, abol 

 ess. However, 

 rs or regional 

 that meet the 

 bility would be 

 ual responsibil 

 rocess or get a 

 nges such as th 

 f erence . 



said that, the 

 reservations of 

 our belief tha 

 any material r 



onmental Defense Fund's proposal to 

 ss under the jurisdiction of the EPA? 



no objection for the permit process to 

 ishment of dual responsibility may 

 if there is a detectable predisposition 

 level against the ocean disposal of 

 requirements of the law then such a 



ill-advised. In any event, 

 ity of the current process alone would 

 t the root of the problems we have 

 ose described earlier in this paper 



Port Authority of New York and New 



assigning this responsibility to EPA 

 t Region II's goal has been to ban all 

 egardless of its ability to meet 





As an example of this, EPA Region II prepared a Final 

 Environmental Impact Statement for the New York Harbor Collection and 

 Removal of Drift Project regarding wood burning at-sea. The project 

 removes wood debris within the harbor and provides great economic 

 benefit and safety of navigation to commercial and private vessels. The 

 Environmental Impact Statement was an outgrowth of public pressure 



