86 



Mr. Studds. I am encouraged. My interest in this question was 

 spurred by hearings in Hyannis when we actually had Federal 

 agencies arguing on the witness stand as to who was responsible 

 for what under the law. 



There was disagreement between NOAA and EPA and Interior 

 about who was responsible for assessing damages after a major 

 spill. There seemed to be general agreement that the Coast Guard 

 was responsible for cleaning it up, but beyond that there was 

 disagreement. I guess that is as good an example as any. 



Mr. Walsh. Yes, sir. Since that time, what we have done in the 

 Federal Government is recognized that that was a completely valid 

 criticism. First we needed to decide who was going to be the chief 

 and who would be the Indians, and then decide what all our tribes 

 were doing, and how to do it without stepping on each other's toes. 

 It is not an easy task in the large, cumbersome bureaucracy that 

 we have. 



Mr. Studds. I think the next level, for example, using the inci- 

 dent of a major oil spill such as that, as the result of this program, 

 we now know who was responsible, even though there is some 

 overlapping. Or is there some clarification? 



Mr. Walsh. There has been clarification. 



Mr. Studds. Someone is now responsible other than just knowing 

 who is responsible? 



Mr. Walsh. Yes. We will make that even more clear as we move 

 down the line to the agency prospectuses. We will be able to tell 

 you the lead agency for drilling muds will be the Department of 

 the Interior. That will be their job. 



Mr. Studds. For research? 



Mr. Walsh. For research. If, however, that agency feels they do 

 not have the expertise and might like to turn to some other 

 agency, we will be able to do that. 



Mr. Studds. For example, if there is a major oil spill, is it clear, 

 or do you know whether or not it is clear, which agency has the 

 responsibility for long-term damage assessment? 



Mr. Walsh. Well, at the present time, based on decisions that 

 have already been made, NOAA is in charge of damage assess- 

 ment. 



Mr. Studds. For monitoring over time? 



Mr. Walsh. Yes; and I believe the national response team is 

 considering right now and recommendations have been made, that 

 NOAA be officially designated the lead agency. 



Mr. Studds. I notice that you have in your ranking of priorities, 

 or in the plan's ranking of priorities, you sort of have three levels, 

 high, medium and low, and you do not attempt to rank within 

 those broad categories. 



Mr. Walsh. No, we did not. But if you will notice, we went 

 beyond just the initial priorities. We made some detailed recom- 

 mendations in the back of the document which break it down by 

 type of activities, by regional bases, and by pollutant. 



Mr. Studds. And you do rank in your subheadings underneath 

 your broad categories. 



Mr. Walsh. Yes, in the back we put whether it is high or 

 medium or low. 



