386 



Den^'ing the Administrator decisive power over permits forces the 

 public to bear much of the risks of non-compliance by dmnpers. 



Section 5B(o-) of H.E. 805 provides that tlie Distric: courts of the 

 United States have jurisdiction to restrain violations of this act. The 

 courts have subpena power and failure to obey the subpena may be 

 punishable by a charge of contempt of court. 



I endorse Section 6 (a), (b), and (d) of the Garmatz bill which 

 provides for both criminal and civil penalties with the District courts 

 having jurisdiction to grant relief as the equities of the case require. 

 I would like to see the District courts having subpena power. 



4. Punishment: 



Section 5B (h) of H.R. 805 provides that each violation of these 

 standards shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 nor 

 less than $5,000. This means that each time refuse is dumped in viola- 

 tion of these standards, the violator is liable for this fine. In many 

 cases, several dumpings or discharges occur per day and each instance 

 is a violation punishable by the fine. 



Mr. Garmatz's bill would provide for a civil penalty of $50,000 for 

 each violation and a criminal penalty of "not more than $50,000 or 

 imprisonment for not more than one year, or both." 



I heartily endorse these higher fines and would amend my bill to 

 include them. In my amendment, however, I would set a minimum 

 fine in criminal penalties of $25,000, retaining the maximum $50,000. 1 

 would also increase the jail sentence to 5 years for repeated convictions. 

 The minimum fine is a stiff one — but the destruction of our environ- 

 n:ient is a deadly serious matter. Stiff minimum fines would he a 

 deterrent from the beginning. 



I would also like to see amended the language of section 6(c) of 

 H.R. 4723 which states, "For the purpose of imposing civil penalties 

 and criminal fines under this section, each day of a continuing viola- 

 tion shall constitute a separate offense." 



I realize that the differences between Chairman Garmatz's bill and 

 mine are very great. This testimony has emphasized those differences 

 but I want to say that there are many portions of H.R. 4723 which I 

 applaud and support. We basically agree on the need for an end to 

 ocean pollution, and this fundamental agreement is what is required 

 for effective legislation. 



I would hope that the committee will seriously consider making 

 the change I have suggested in my testimony. 



All forms of ocean pollution must be covered — including municipal 

 and industrial effluents and oil. Witliout a coordinated and compre- 

 hensive program, we are never going to be able to regulate cleaner 

 oceans. 



■ The Federal Government must make standards which are applicable 

 to the States — otherwise chaotic enforcement will ensue, and we 

 could continue to have serious pollution problems throughout the 

 country. 



^fost impo:^tantly, Mr. Speaker, our standard must be no pollution. 

 We have alread}^ done irreparable damage to our waters through 

 ignorance and laziness. We must develop alternate means of waste 

 disposal and we need a far greater Federal investment in municipal 

 and industrial Avaste treatment. 



