507 
that wishes to use that option will have to have a permit and the 
permit will be the burden of the applying agency to comply with 
them. 
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. Have you communicated at all with the Envi- 
ronmental Protection Agency indicating your support for the moni- 
toring of these sites and indicated any concern about budget reduc- 
tions in those areas? 
Mr. Wuite. Yes. We believe that the EPA budget like every 
other one has to go through the wringer but that we hope that the 
monitoring will not be the program that has to go completely. Most 
every permit does require the agency itself to do monitoring. We 
believe that monitoring is a key to it and we have suggested, in re- 
sponse to Congressman Forsythe, that we think that some of the 
agencies ought to contribute in some fashion to the cost of that 
during this stringent budget period. 
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. Have you made this, for the record, a concrete 
recommendation to the Environmental Protection Agency? 
Mr. Wuite. I think the answer is no. We have had some discus- 
sions, but the direct formal answer is no. I can assure you that we 
will as a result of your question. 
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. I think it is important for you to know that the 
monitoring budget for EPA is being so severely gutted that the re- 
sponsibility and the burden more likely than not will fall upon all 
of your coastal States. Yet you have just gotten done telling me 
that you are lacking criteria in certain situations and by using this 
budgetary process of going after monitoring I can only see total 
havoc resulting. I think that now would be the time for you to com- 
municate your concerns, not only to this committee but other com- 
mittees that deal with the budget for EPA and for monitoring of 
ocean dumping and get on the record. 
The Association of Coastal States has a lot to gain or a lot to 
lose, depending on how that budget does develop and at this point 
it is a disaster. 
Mr. Wuirte. That is a useful suggestion and we will certainly 
follow it up, because I know that we are anxious. Not only EPA but 
the NOAA monitoring budget is in bad shape. It is unfortunate 
that when things have to give, when there are cuts, we look to 
those things that do not absolutely immediately affect us and, 
indeed, it is shortsighted because this is important. 
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. Well, that is what concerns me, the shortsight- 
edness of it all. I think it is quite clear that if we do not monitor 
we will end up paying more in the long run either through in- 
creased taxes to clean up the problems that we may have caused or 
through human health problems. And I think that you are repre- 
senting an organization that of course is dedicated to public service 
and I think it is critically important that that point be made to the 
decisionmakers as quickly as possible. 
Those are all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 
Mr. HuGues. The gentleman from Delaware is recognized. 
Mr. Evans. I would like to associate myself with the remarks of 
the gentlewoman from Rhode Island and the gentleman from New 
Jersey, Mr. Hughes. I do believe in terms of the remarks of the 
gentlewoman from Rhode Island that it is pennywise and dollar 
foolish not to focus attention on the monitoring and development of 
