381 



and Wildlife Service, and in consultation witli the Army Chief of En- 

 gineers, to establish standards — 



which apply to the deposit or discliarge into the ocean, coastal and other 

 waters of the United States of all industrial wastes, sludge, spoil and all other 

 materials that might be harmful to the wildlife or wildlife resources or to the 

 ecology of these waters. 



This section gives the Administrator jurisdiction over all wastes en- 

 tering the coastal waters. 



I have included the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the standard 

 making, because they have some experience with ocean dumping, and 

 the mechanism is already established for issuance of dumping permits 

 by them under the provisions of the 1899 Refuse Act. 



The Corps has not distinguished itself in its enforcement of the 

 Refuse Act, but with the Presidential order of last December and the 

 new^ regulations presently being reviewed — and most importantly with 

 new legislation, which this committee is considering, mandating pro- 

 tection of our oceans — the Corps will have the mechanism ready to go 

 to enforce antidumping regulations. 



Congressman Garmatz' bill would have the Administrator of the 

 EPA establish or revise criteria (section 5(a)) in consultation with 

 the Secretaries of Conunerce, Interior, State, Defense, Agriculture, 

 Health, Education, and Welfare, and Transportation, the Atomic 

 Energy Commission, and other appropriate Federal, State, and local 

 officials. 



I find this long list a little bewildering. The problem with the Gov- 

 ernment now is red tape and vested interests. Is it not time to allow the 

 person in charge of j^rotecting the environment some latitude in do- 

 ing his job? Will not consultations with so many different agencies 

 merely delay the setting of criteria? Xo one has done any kind of job 

 in this area to date. We need less consultation and more action. 



Congressman Garmatz' bill exempts '"effluent from any outfall struc- 

 ture," and oil. I see no point in relying on the existing fragmented 

 regulatory structure dealing with these types of waste. Oil spillage 

 and effluent from sewer outfalls contribute heavily to the pollution of 

 our most valuable recreational and commercial coastal waters. The 

 problem of ocean pollution, from whatever source, deserves treatment 

 with coherent, comprehensive legislation. 



I consider the exemi^tions of oil and effluents from outfall structures 

 to be one of the most serious deficiencies of the Garmatz bill. The ex- 

 emption of these two pollutants is totally unacceptable. 



The disposal of domestic wastes of all kinds iiito our coastal waters 

 has introduced toxic heavy metals and organics into these waters. The 

 result has been to lower the available oxygen content of the bottom 

 water. 



Our new teclniology has also created new kinds and larger amounts 

 of material which must be disposed of. During the past 30 years we 

 have disposed of many synthetic chemicals heretofore unknown. 



These chemicals are foreign to organisms, and natural pathways of 

 biodegradation are lacking or inefficient. Thus, many chemicals now 

 dumped into our coastal waters enter the marine food chain and in- 

 crease in density as they move through the chain until they become 

 harmful to both marine and human life. 



