218 



involved and the concentration of interest in a given agency in only specific types 

 of wastes. 



Also, the expertise in one agency often isn't made available to an- 

 other. There is also breakdown in obtaining and processing environ- 

 mental data to assess future waste disposal activities. At present, there 

 isn't a continuous monitoring and surveillance of disposal activities. 



Furthermore, there is no regulation of dumping by other nationals 

 within the contiguous zone. Legislation has not been passed to imple- 

 ment article 24 of the Convention of the Territorial Sea and Con- 

 tiguous Zone of 1958. 



Mr. Chairman, the legislation which I have introduced not only 

 clears up this administrative mess, but also creates the authority neces- 

 sary to effectively regulate clean dumpmg. 



In my opinion, this bill offers several important and desirable fea- 

 tures which are lacking in the bill proposed by the administration. In 

 addition, by bill, unlike that of the administration, conforms closely 

 to the recommendations of the Council of Environmental Quality as 

 to what provisions ocean dumping legislation should contain. These 

 recommendations, it should be remembered, were the result of a com- 

 prehensive study initiated by President Nixon on April 15, 1970. 



It is important that we in the Congress decide the kinds and places 

 of dumping that should be proscribed and not leave it simply to the 

 discretion of the Administrator. After all, it is the lack of specific 

 guidelines and direction which has caused indecisiveness on the part 

 of the administering agencies. Furthermore, this is an area of such 

 importance that strong legislation is required. Delegating full au- 

 thority to the Administrator of EPA could easily result in a so-called 

 balancing of interests which would result in less stringent regula- 

 tions and enforcement. The Congress should establish a national policy 

 embodying specific guidelines to halt the practice of using our 

 coastal areas and Great Lakes as a dumping ground simply because 

 it is the "cheapest method of disposal." The fact is that the dollar cost 

 of ocean dumping coupled with the ecological costs make it the most 

 costly method. 



The legislation I have introduced has a threefold approach. First, 

 instead of designating areas where dumping may be conducted safe- 

 ly, my bill concentrates on determining which areas of our marine 

 environment are most valuable and setting them aside as sanctuaries. 

 Second, similar to the administration's proposal, my bill also prohibits 

 the dumping of waste material into the oceans, coastal waters, and es- 

 tuarine areas, except imder a j)ermit signed by the Admmistrator of 

 the EPA. Third, the bill proscribes absolutely the dumping of toxic, 

 radioactive, and chemical biological warfare material. 



I have chosen as a vehicle for this legislation the act of August 3, 

 1969, which declared as a national policy the concept that the estu- 

 arine areas of the United States are of great value to America and must 

 be protected and conserved for the future of this Nation. This act was 

 chosen, Mr. Chairman, because of the need to relate the problem 

 of ocean dumping to the broader problem of preserving certain eco- 

 systems within the coastal zone area. This need exists because the 

 dumping of dredge spoil constitutes the largest single element in the 

 growing volume of refuse being dumj)ed into the ocean. 



