208 



the State in question had stricter rules than those prescribed by the 

 Administrator, that the Administrator in granting the permit would 

 take those more strict rules into account. 



Mr. Andersox. Who would be the one to determine which is more 

 strict? 



I could see where a small jurisdiction could have more stringent 

 requirements in a particular area while a larger State jurisdiction, for 

 example, could ha^-e strict requirements overall. Who determines 

 which requirements apply ? 



Mr. Train. Well, of course, the Administrator will be referring his 

 permit application for comment to the applicable State and the local 

 water qualit}'^ agency where there is a case of dumping within the 

 3-mile limit, and the State would make representations at least as to 

 whether or not the proposed dumping would contravene State water 

 quality standards. 



I suppose in the final analysis, the Administrator of EPA would 

 have to make that determination. 



Mr. Anderson. So there would then be one permit, but the appli- 

 cant would in effect have to comply with the requirements of both ? 



Mr. Train. Really it would be the requirements laid down by the 

 Environmental Protection Agency, but they could in that case be 

 stricter standards than EPA would be applying perhaps in some 

 other coastal area. 



Mr. Anderson. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Dingell. Mr. Pelly. 



Mr. Pelly. No questions. 



Mr. Dingell. Mr. Train, it is always a privilege to have you before 

 this committee, and j'ou deserve congratulations with respect to j^our 

 very fine work. 



It is a long time since we have had you before this committee, and 

 everytime it has always been a pleasure. 



Mr. Train. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is always a pleasure to 

 be here. 



]SIr. Dingell. We also express our thanks to your associate. 



Our next witness is Mr. Paul A. Amundsen, executive director of 

 the American Association of Port Authorities. 



Mr. Amundsen. Mr. Chairman, I understood we were to testify 

 tomorrow afternoon. 



Mr. Dingell. The witness list indicates you were to be heard today. 



If you wish to be heard tomorrow afternoon, we will make an op- 

 portunity for 3^011 to be heard tomorrow. 



Mr. Amundsen. I would be glad to be heard, but I do not have my 

 statement with me. 



Mr. Dingell. We will tiy to hear you tomorrow afternoon. 



I suspect we have a rather full schedule tomorrow, but we will try 

 to give you an opportunity to get your statement before this 

 committee. 



ISIr. Amundsen. Mr. Langiois is our witness tomorrow of tlie Port 

 of Portland, Maine. 



JNIr. Dingell. Perhaps it would be helpful for the Chair to read off 

 the list of witnesses. 



Tomoi'row morning we have several of our colleagues scheduled to 

 testify. 



