307 



Mr. DiNGELi.. Now, Mr. Tx)esch, in fairness to you, I would like to 

 have you refer to the bill, and I am going to have to ask counsel here 

 to help me. The administration bill, does not provide that the Environ- 

 mental Protection Agency must consult with the Interior Department. 



It occurs to me that in many of the statutes which we have had before 

 this body, it has been a clear requirement of the statute, for example, 

 as in the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, that the agency issuing 

 the permit must consult with your agency. 



Mr. LoESCH. Mr. Chairman, if I am not mistaken also, the bill pro- 

 vides for the consultation, as adverted to in my formal statement, with 

 the Department of the Interior, in creating or developing the stand- 

 ards on which the permit applications will be measured, but does not 

 provide for consultation as to the issuance or refusal of individual 

 permits. 



Mr. DiNGELL. That is the precise point. 



Now we have situations where they must consult, in establishing or 

 revising criteria. 



Mr. LoESCH. Exactly. 



Mr. DiNGELL, But we have a situation where they may i^ue per- 

 mits, without consultation with the Interior Department, Now, I am 

 wondering, what are your views on that particular point ? Would you 

 have any objection to having them consult with your agency on mat- 

 ters of this sort ? 



Mr. LoESCH. No, I don't think we would have any objection, Mr. 

 Chairman. 



I bring to your attention the fact that if we are fully consulted, as 

 we certainly expect to be, in the development of the necessary criteria, 

 that it would then seem a little supererogatory, perhaps, to require con- 

 sultation by EPA on every single permit, and could, I sense, slow 

 down the process, perhaps. 



But we wouldn't have any objection, and, of course, we would have 

 the expertise to judge a permit application. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Right. 



Now the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act says that : 



Whenever the waters of any stream or body of water are proposed or author- 

 ized to be impounded, diverted, the channel deepened, or the stream or other 

 body of water otherwise controlled or modified for any puri)ose whatever, in- 

 cluding navigation and drainage, by any department or agency of the United 

 States, or by any public or private agency under federal permit or license, such 

 department or agency first shall consult with the United States Fish and Wild- 

 life Ser^^ce, Department of the Interior, and with the head of the agency exer- 

 cising the administration over the wildlife resources of the particular State 

 wherein the impoundment, diversion or other control facility is to be con- 

 structed, with a view to the consideration of wildUfe resources by preventing 

 loss of and damage to such resources as well as providing for the development 

 and improvement thereof in connection with such water-resource development. 



Now that is the requirement of the Fish and Wildlife Coordina- 

 tion Act. There is no such requirement here. 



Mr. LoESCH. No ; but the Coordination Act is still going to be in full 

 force and effect, so that any agency who is presently required under 

 that act to consult with us will have to consult with us as well under 

 the new act. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Well, of course, here we have the peculiar situation 

 where the language of a later statute says they "may", and the ear- 

 lier statute, the Coordination Act says they "shall". 



