186 



Mr. Train. No, sir; I believe these would be standards set by the 

 Federal Government which would apply to the contiguous zone. 



Mr. DiNGELL. You are not going to go through the mechanism then 

 that you have with water quality standards ? 



Mr. Train. We have mechanisms under the existing law for the Fed- 

 eral Government to set standard's in cases where States refuse to set 

 standards. 



Mr. DiNGELL, I am going unduly into my colleague's time but the 

 State sets standards, the Federal Government approves them and the 

 State enforces them. Now are you going to use a different mechanism 

 with regard to the distance between 3 and 4 miles offshore ? 



Mr. Train. That is the legislation that has been before Congress 

 since last year; yes. The States have no regulatory authority over the 

 contiguous zone, it is entirely a matter of Federal regulation and it 

 always has been. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Do you propose to set up specific Federal water 

 quality standards of the contiguous zone between the 3 and 12 mile 

 limit ? 



Mr. Train. That is my understp.nding of the proposal. 



Mr. DiNGELL. As opposed to the State mechanism ? 



Mr. Train. Yes, sir. 



Mr. DiNGELL. I see. 



Mr. McClosket. I have a question that I think also justifies consid- 

 eration here in view of your last answer, Mr. Train. In the San 

 Francisco Bay area one of the proposals is the so-called Kaiser plan 

 which would take sewage an undetermined number of miles out into 

 the Pacific Ocean for disposal. I gather from your testimony under 

 this Act that if dumping occurs 12 miles out, those dumpings would be 

 immune to Federal regulation. 



We have the danger here that, unless this legislation goes precisely 

 to this question, the entire local government- State government op- 

 eration, involving hundreds of millions of dollars, would not know 

 what to expect from the Federal Government on the question of the 

 right to dump sewage 12 miles out. It seems to me that the question of 

 the long 15-mile sewer outfall ought to receive concern, for example. 



The other question, though, is with our separate act. 



Mr. Lennon. Would the gentleman yield ? 



Let the gentleman comment on that question. 



Mr. Train. I agree with you. I think the legislation should address 

 itself to that problem. 



Mr. Lennon. Thank you. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Would the gentleman just yield ? 



Would you want to give us some language that might be helpful 

 to the committee in coming to some proper judgments as to how we 

 could meet the approval of the legislation and carry out the matter 

 that our good friend from California just suggested ? 



Mr. Train. I think what I would suggest is that we will work with 

 the Environmental Protection Agency on this together with your staff' 

 and see what we can suggest along those lones. 



Mr. Ktros. Would the chairman yield ? 



Mr. Lennon. We are really cutting in on Mr. McCloskey's time. 



Mr. Kyros. Don't sections 4 and 5 already cover that, Mr. Train ? 

 It says here you can issue permits for transportation, and then, under 



