203 
necessary trade-offs. This Committee has before it draft 
amendments to the Marine Protection Act which would largely 
ignore this undeniable reality. I understand the Committee's 
concern that the ocean not beconie the ultimate waste disposal 
medium by default. By the same token, I urge this Committee not 
to turn its back on a balanced, scientific approach to waste 
disposal. -Rather, I urge the Committee to take up the challenge 
of directing the regulatory process towards an integrated, 
scientifically based approach to waste disposal decisions. 
The ocean has an immense capacity to absorb, recycle, or 
dilute waste materials. This does not mean that this capacity 
is infinite. Nor does it mean that disposal of wastes in the 
ocean will not potentially affect ocean use for commerce, 
recreation, and food, or that waste disposal will not have some 
potential effects on marine ecosystems and human health. What 
it does mean, however, is that the ocean should not be auto- 
matically closed off as one option for waste disposal; that the 
impacts of proposed ocean disposal of specific material should 
be scientifically assessed in each particular instance where it 
is proposed, and compared with other options available; and that 
the impacts of direct waste inputs into the ocean should be put 
in perspective with regard to the total contaminant loading of 
the oceans. 
Having established this general premise, I would like 
briefly to review for the Committee the impact of the proposed 
