404 



was already submitted ? In the President's budget, what figure is that 

 for solid waste ? 



Mr. RucKELSHAUS. I think it is between $17 and $19 million, 



Mr. HoGERS. As I recall, it is about $17 million, maybe it is 

 $19 million, which is far under the authorization, isn't it? 



Mr. RucKELSHAus. Yes, that is right. 



Mr. Rogers. About how much under ? 



Mr, Rtjckelshaus. Well again I would have to look at that authori- 

 zation figure in the act. 



IMr. Rogers. Are any of your people here who could help us? I 

 realize you may not have every figure in your mind. Don't you have 

 some Solid Waste peo2)le here who can help us ? 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. No, we don't have any Solid Waste people here 

 with that figure. 



Mr. Rogers. Well, I won't pursue that at this time, if you will 

 furnish that for the record. 



(The following was submitted in response to the above:) 



This information has not yet been cleared by the Office of Management and 

 Budget. It will be provided as soon as such clearance has been obtained. 



Mr. Rogers. Don't you think it is a good idea to have specific dead- 

 lines as to when we should say everything must have primary, second- 

 ary, tertiary treatment before you dump it in the waters? Would you 

 support, that principle ? 



Mr. RucKELSHArs. I think it is a good idea to have deadlines. I 

 think it is a question of whether it is to have deadlines in the act or 

 whether to have deadlines administratively proposed. 



Mr. Rogers. Have you set any deadlines ? 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. ISTo, because we don't have authorization to set 

 deadlines at all. 



Mr. Rogers. Then we ought to either give you deadlines or give you 

 the authorization to do it ? 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. Yes, I think that is right. 



Mr. Rogers. In jDrinciple, you are for that, as I recall, and 3'ou were 

 for that in the air pollution bill. 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. Yes. 



Mr. Rogers. We have that in the proposal and I am hopeful we can 

 do it, and I see no reason why it could not be done legislatively. 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. It is my belief that, where you have a problem 

 that may be complex, as where different kinds of dumpings that are 

 involved, that there ought to be legislative authorization to have 

 administrative agency set the deadlines. 



Mr. Rogers. Perhaps if we set the goal, we may have some slii:»pagp — 

 we hope not — but in principle you agree to the deadline idea ? 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. Yes. 



Mr. Rogers. Let me ask you this. Do you think municipal sewage and 

 discharge of waste should be exempt from any requirement of permits ? 



Mr. Ruckelshaus. That is covered under the Water Pollution Con- 

 trol Act. Mr. Rogers. We think it is better to control it under that act 

 than to try to control under the provisions of this act. We don't want 

 to exempt them from regulation, but we think the regulation under 

 the Water Pollution Control Act is a more efi'ective way of doing it 

 than through ocean dumping control legislation. 



