321 
utilized and industrialized port areas, is significantly contaminated 
with persistent toxic chemicals, sewage, and microorganisms. 
The Ocean Dumping Law currently allows dredged material to be 
ocean-dumped, notwithstanding unreasonable degradation to the marine 
environment, if the Secretary of the Army certifies that there is an 
overriding need based on the tAgarents of commerce and navigation to 
proceed with the dumping (provided the EPA Administrator does not find 
that "unacceptable adverse impacts" on specified fish and shellfish 
resources will occur). However, in cases where dredged material contains 
certain "black-listed" (Annex I) constituents (mercury and cadmium 
compounds, organohalogens, and oil and grease) as other than "trace ~ 
contaminants", the London Dumping Convention permits no waiver of the 
environmental effects criteria and the prohibition on dumping is 
(virtually) absolute. 
Despite what might seem a significant potential for conflict 
between requirements and the needs of navigational dredging, in 
only two instances in the entire 10-year history of implementation 
of the Ocean Dumping Law has permission to ocean-dump dredged 
material been withheld, even temporarily, on the basis of excessive 
contamination. 
Effect of the Draft Amendments: 
The proposed modifications to the dredeed material provisions of 
section 103 are awkwardly and confusingly worded. However, as I 
understand the thrust and intent of the proposals they would retain 
both the structure of the existing section and the present parallelism 
between the environmental effects evaluations of dredged and non-dredged 
wastes. "Degrading" and even “unreasonably degrading" dredged material 
