78 



I do want to make one serious definition because it doesn't appear in 

 the commission's report. That relates to the criterion of maximizing 

 net social return. 



This is an aggregate measure of present value of benefits minus 

 costs. 



It does not measure the incidence of the benefits or the incidence of 

 the cost. Since the incidence rarely if ever falls on the same parties, 

 then the different parties will choose different things. 



I think in light of the time, I would prefer to stop at that point. 



Tha,nk you. 



Mr. CLiNGAisr. Well, we seem to have a lot of meat out for discussion. 

 I appreciate your comments Mr. Haefele, on the public hearing 

 process. 



Mr. Robert Krtjegee. I have a question for Mr. Porro. He stated 

 that when he began perhaps we would want to call him some other 

 names when he finished. I think that perhaps a wouldn't choose to 

 call his anjrthing else, but I might choose to call his comments in part 

 superficial. 



In California, I believe we have shown that the premise of a 

 prospective grant-in-aid in favor of coastal development has been 

 effective. 



We did create a new department to take advantage of a law that has 

 not yet been enacted. Perhaps the other States might also show this 

 same willingness once a law is enacted. 



Secondly, the interest of the State in the coastal zone cannot be 

 ignored. Note in particular they own the coastal zone under the 

 Submerged Lands Act. 



Their title was a very gravely considered point from a national 

 policy standpoint, and to interject the complete political revision in the 

 system would raise issues that would make this audience and most State 

 audiences much less receptive to a program of the type that your 

 committee is considering. 



Thank you. 



Mr. PoRRO. I would like to say that I am very glad that I idolized 

 some of the States, because California, if you will recognize, was the 

 first State I referred to. I would like to say publicly that I have read 

 the California reports and I am well aware of what is happening in 

 California. 



You are to be complimented. 



Unfortunately, that is not a complete pattern throughout the rest 

 of the States. 



Let me take your word "superficial." Yes; it was superficial in 

 presentation here today. 



I have submitted a detailed statement which is not quite as 

 superficial and does go into this in much more detail. 



With regard to ignoring the State, when you read the proposal 

 you will see that the State participation is much stronger than it is 

 right now. 



I would like to make it absolutely clear to anyone who is under 

 any misconceptions, you are living with this same kind of concept 

 right now with many acts that are in existence, such as the Clean 

 Water Pollution Control Act and such as the Water Resources Act. 



This is all that is being proposed. But sometimes, to get across a 



