423 



ards, that State ought to be allowed to do that as long as it knows what it is 

 doing. 



"It is the same in the area of ocean dumping ; if we set standards for ocean 

 dujnping — and there is boimd to be conflict of opinion about these standards — 

 there are going to be people who disagree. If States want to have strict standards 

 so the beaches are absolutely pristine in their purity, it again seems to me within 

 their jurisdictional right they ought to have the power to do that. And it is 

 for that reason that we have not provided for preemption in this bill." 



Mr. Du Pont. Mr. Chairman, I am over my time. Let me ask one 

 more question. 



Do you have an estimate of the number of ocean dumping permits 

 that you think you would have to handle every year under this legis- 

 lation, and do you think you have adequate provisions for staff to 

 take care of that ? 



Mr. EucKELSHAus. Our present estimate is approximately 3,000 

 permits would be issued. We have reques^-ed, and we will submit for 

 the record our request for increased funding that will be necessary to 

 talve care of this permit program. We don't have adequate staff now. 

 We will need more people to handle this program, and we think the 

 funding we have requested will provide us with the additional staff 

 necessary. 



Mr. Du Pont. Thank you. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Thank you, Mr. du Pont. 



Mr. Karth? 



Mr. Karth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Administrator, getting back to deadlines, one of our colleagues 

 testified in opposition to deadlines. His reasoning was, if you set a 

 d-j^ep.r limit, everj^one affected by the deadline will wait 4 years, 11 

 months, and 29 days, to comply and they would probably make a 

 greater effort and sj^end more money to run out the clock than to 

 comply with the act. 



Mr. EucKELsiTAus. I think you are right. That is why I am against 

 the legislatively imposed deadlines. In the case you mention we are 

 talking about one industry, the automotive industry, and the problem 

 is common to everyone in the industry. To set a deadline legislatively 

 makes some sense in that case, but to try to set a deadline legislatively 

 for all dumping in the ocean when we have so many kinds of problems 

 involved in dumping does not make as m.uch sense to me. Becausei, 

 wherever you set it, there are some people who even though they could 

 stop immediately, would be inhibited from doing this, or at least not 

 encouraged, because of this 12-month deadline. 



Mr. Karth. What do you think is a reasonable deadline so long as 

 you suggest that this committee allow you that authority? What do 

 you think is fair, 6 months or a year ? 



Mr. EucKELSHATJS. As I say, the authorization would be for dead- 

 lines to be set administratively and you might put it within a certain 

 framework. You might set an upper limit. 



Mr. Karth. That is right, but I think this committee ought to know 

 wliat you have in mind. 



Mr. EucKELSHAus. It would depend on the particular dumper. If 

 we are talking about municipal sludge, there may be an available al- 

 ternative site for them to take care of the sludge problem. There should 

 be no deadline. They should simply put the sludge in a different place. 



