331 
cover the costs of the environmental analysis and review, and the alternatives 
evaluation, specified under subsection (c) (2) of this section, plus an appropriate 
amount to be applied toward the costs of site designation and monitoring pursuant 
to section 102(c) (3) and title II." 
p-_ 15, lines 13-25; page 16, lines 1-9: This subparagraph can be made more 
succinct (and more consistent with the Department of Transportation Act's two-pronged 
test) by revising it to read as follows—"(B) The Administrator, after taking 
into account the results of the analysis and reviews required under section 102(c), 
shall require interim permittees to take all possible steps to ensure that the 
transportation and dumping of material will be conducted in a manner that minimizes 
adverse effects on the health, environmental, and resource values enumerated in 
section 102(a)." 
p- 16, line 17: Add, after "recycling", the words "or beneficially utilizing." 
Suggestions for Additional Fine-Tuning Amendments 
1. Clarification of the definition of "high-level" radioactive waste"—-Revise 
the first sentence of section 102(a) to insert, following the words "high-level 
radioactive waste", the parenthetical phrase: "(including seabed emplacement thereof) ." 
This is necessary to clearly refute the contention of at least one Federal agency 
that burying something in the seabed for disposal purposes is not ocean dumping. 
2. The Ocean Dumping Law should be amended to make the toxic substances 
limitations established by EPA pursuant to section 307 of the Federal Clean Water 
Act (P.L. 92-500) applicable to ocean dumping under the Ocean Dumping Law. This is 
necessary to eliminate any incentive for waste disposers to transfer discharges 
which cannot lawfully be made into inland waters to the ocean, merely because of the 
lack of parallel requirements. 
