267 



Mr. DiNGELL. I have always found you a capable witness. 



Mr. LoESCH. Thank you, sir. 



Mr. Chairman, my statement, as you may have noticed, is a rather 

 general one, and unless the Chair prefers otherwise, I would just as 

 soon have it placed in the record, and highlight it very briefly. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Without objection, that is ordered and while we are 

 discussing matters of that sort, Mr. Loesch, I will observe that the In- 

 terior Department has submitted to this committee a series of reports 

 on legislation before us. I will tell you that you are the first, and the 

 only department which has done so, and I must confess it is with a 

 measure of pleasure that I compliment you and regretfully observe 

 that other agencies have not carried out their duties in the same 

 fashion. 



Mr. Loesch. I must say, Mr. Chairman, that that is a compliment I 

 am not really used to receiving. Before certain other committees of 

 this House, 1 am quite often criticized because the reports didn't get 

 there until I did. I appreciate it. 



Well, Mr. Chairman, my report, of course, adverts to the dangers 

 and damages of dumping in the ocean, which I think this committee is 

 especially very well acquainted with already. I think we need not go 

 into the general nature of the damage and pollution which the legisla- 

 tion before this committee is designed to correct. 



We especially are commenting on H.R. 4247 and H.R. 4723, now 

 pending before the full committee, which is the result of cooperation 

 between a number of the Federal agencies, including our own. 



And those bill vest, of course, in the Administrator of the EPA the 

 authority to control the ocean dumping through permits and enforce- 

 ment of prohibitions against unauthorized transport or dumping of 

 waste materials. 



In determining whether or not to approve the permit applications 

 provided for by the legislation, the Administrator would have to con- 

 sider the impact of dumping on the marine environment and human 

 welfare, and other possible locations and methods of disposal, includ- 

 ing land based alternatives. 



To my mind, it is quite similar to the situation under the National 

 Environmental Policy Act, which requires us in performing any or in 

 studying any proposal to consider all possible alternatives which might 

 have a less adverse effect or no effect at all upon the environment. 



I haven't any doubt, though I am not acquainted with what has gone 

 on before in this hearing before this committee, that the Environ- 

 mental Protection Agency has presented the specific of this mat- 

 ter, and I think we should note that the proposal by that agency in- 

 corporates several provisions of the other bills, of which I believe, if I 

 am not mistaken, there are about 20, altogether. 



Mr. DiNGELL. At least. 



Mr. Loesch. The comprehensive framework provided by these two 

 bills, we wish to support. We believe that the consultation provided for 

 in the act between the Administrator and the Department of the Inte- 

 rior and others, would establish the proper criteria, and would afford 

 our Department an opportunity to contribute the knowledge and ex- 

 pertise of the marine environment that we have, and to seek the pro- 

 tection of wildlife, minerals, recreation resources, for which we have 

 the primary responsibility. 



