173 



cases to which you referred do arise and we have to keep working on 

 them. 



Mr. Rogers. I think some action needs to be taken, and also on mer- 

 cury. I think we could have prohibited the dumping of mercury but 

 the agencies still have not done this. We know it takes action, we know 

 the deadliness of it. We have had a few suits brought where they still 

 permit them to continue, and I would hope you could encourage some 

 action, too. 



I won't continue now because I know the other members have ques- 

 tions. There are many questions I would like to go into. Mr. Chair- 

 man, with Mr. Train at a later time. 



]Mr. Len^ton. Would you like to submit the specific questions and let 

 him include them in the policy review '? 



jNIr. Rogers. Some of them. I think it would be actually helpful to 

 have a little rapport because you don't always get the answer you 

 need. 



Mr. Lennon. Thank vou. 



Mr. Pelly. 



Mv. Pellt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Train, before you came into the hearing room one of the wit- 

 nesses testifying in behalf of his own bill said that the administra- 

 tion bill is lacking in the major provision of his own original legisla- 

 tion — the establishment of no dumping sanctuaries for marine life. His 

 comment was that "Proposals which simply move dumping grounds 

 from one area to another are myopic and only increase the danger of 

 prolonged pollution and international complications growing out of 

 contaminating the world's oceans." 



I think you referred to the subject of sanctuaries in your discussion. 

 Would you care to comment on this witness's statement ? 



Mr. Train. I suspect I was commenting upon the same bill, although 

 I am not certain. I was simply noting for the information of the com- 

 mittee that under the administration bill — while it does not have a 

 marine sanctuary section in it, that was not really the purpose of the 

 legislation — it does have authority for the Administrator of EPA to 

 prevent any form of dumping in certain fixed areas at his discretion. 



Mr. Pelly. In other words, yon don't agree that the administration 

 bill would result in just moving a contaminated area from one place to 

 another ? 



Mr. Train. Oh, no; certainly not. The administration bill, that is, 

 the ]5urpose of the bill, is to either stop or to phase out as rapidly as 

 possible all harmful dumping. 



Mr. Pelly. In the administration bill there would be a requirement 

 for a permit for transportation of material in the United States to be 

 dumped anywhere at sea and then also it would require a permit for 

 the actual dumping by any person. Is that duplication or is there any 

 reason for the distinction ? 



Mr. Train. We are not talking about two permits. It is the trans- 

 portation from the United States which is the jurisdictional hook, if 

 you will, upon which we hang the authority of the United States to 

 regulate dumping anywhere in the world. So if a ship carries wastes 

 from a U.S. port to dump anywhere in the world, it will have to have 

 a permit from the Administrator of the EPA. 



