211 
of sewage sludge at the site and virtually no evidence that 
the Bight has been unable to assimilate these wastes. Tech- 
nical document B, which I will submit for the record, summarizes 
the most recent scientific evidence on the effects of sewage 
sludge on the New York Bight and nearby water areas. However, 
I would like to highlight several findings for the Committee: 
-- The digested sewage sludge which is barged to the 
Bight contains only 1-5% solids and is readily 
dispersed and diluted at the site. 
-- Ocean dumped sewage sludge contributes a minor 
fraction (generally 1-102) of the total annual 
mass contaminant loads to the Bight. The Hud- 
son River drains tens of thousands of square 
miles of land from upstate New York through the 
New York metropolitan area before emptying into 
the Bight. Direct municipal and industrialized 
wastewater discharges are another -- and the 
most significant -- source of pollutants to the 
Bight. Estimates published by NOAA in 1976 in- 
dicate that the major inputs of trace metals, 
suspended solids, nutrients, and coliform bac- 
teria originated from the Hudson-Raritan estuary. 
-- A 1981 NOAA survey report on the Northeast coastal 
waters indicates that the occurrence of infectious 
and non-infectious fish diseases in the Bight is 
very low and none is unique to the New York Bight. 
-- The New York Bight Apex continues to support a 
valuable and viable sport and commercial fishery. 
Elimination of sludge disposal in the area would 
be of no benefit to the fishery. 
-- Continued use of the existing site is not a present 
threat either to public health or to water quality 
along the Long Island or the New Jersey beaches. 
-- Any potential human health impact from the consumpt- 
ion of sea food from the Bight is minimal and well 
below levels set by FDA for fish and shellfish. 
Harbor dredging activities for the Port of New York and 
New Jersey would also be significantly affected by the proposed 
-ll- 
