344 
Mr. Evans. I asked at the end of the hearing of Mayor Koch that 
same question, and he is going to respond in writing to that ques- 
tion. 
Mr. KAMLET. I do know that the State of New York does contrib- 
ute some share of sewage treatment construction grant funds to 
New York City, on the order of 12 or 12.5 percent, as I recall. Some 
of that construction grants money, of course, can be used to fund 
alternatives for managing sewage sludge. However, beyond that, I 
au not aware of specific involvement on the part of New York 
tate. 
Mr. Evans. Mr. Kamlet, thank you very much for being here 
this afternoon. 
Mr. KAMLET. I appreciate the opportunity. 
Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
Mr. D’Amours. Thank you. | 
Just 1 minute, Ken. I have one more question. 
Fred Harper of the Conference of Coastal Agencies is going to be 
testifying in a little bit. He says in his testimony that there is a 
consensus within the scientific community that the environmental 
problems encountered in ocean disposal are no more significant 
than those encountered in utilization of sludge on land, and often 
considerably less. 
He also says that the marine scientific community generally 
agrees that while cadmium is a potentially severe problem in land- 
based disposal methods such as incineration or spreading, it is con- 
siderably less a problem in the oceans because of the ocean’s ability 
to lock up cadmium permanently in ocean sediments. 
What are your reactions to that testimony? 
Mr. KAMLET. Let me react first with a general observation and 
then a bit more specifically. The general observation I would make 
is that it seems to me, and I think as an abstract matter most sci- 
entists would agree with this proposition, that where you are deal- 
ing with persistent toxic contaminants the disposal approach or the 
management approach that makes the most sense is isolation and 
containment to the maximum extent possible. On the other hand, 
where you are dealing with a readily biodegradable or innocuous 
material, it makes sense to try to disperse the material and facili- 
tate biodegradation of that material. Cadmium and other heavy 
metals are persistent toxic materials. They are elemental forms of 
matter. You cannot break them down to any lesser unit. 
On that basis, a waste management strategy that emphasizes 
containment makes a great deal more sense than one that pro- 
motes dispersal. As between the ocean and the land, the ocean is 
the quintessential dispersal medium whereas the land, imperfect 
though it may sometimes be, is the best containment medium that 
we have. Obviously one needs to be cautious in connection with 
this, but my money is on the land in terms of the ability to safely 
contain the contaminants associated with’sewage sludge. 
Mr. D’Amours. The testimony I cited, though, refers to a consen- 
sus within the scientific community. Are you aware of any such 
consensus? 
Mr. KAMLET. I am certainly not aware of any consensus to the 
effect that impacts on the ocean are less in connection with cadmi- 
um or anything else than they are on the land. To the contrary, 
