658 
Jan. 29, 1982) (suggestion for rehearing en banc unanimously denied 
Mar. 10, 1982), now pending in the Supreme Court on a jurisdictional 
statement filed by intervenor Process Gas Consumer Group No. 80-2008 
(S. Ct., Apr. 29, 1982). See also Chada v. Immigration and Natural- 
ization Service, 634 F.2d 408 (9th Cir. 1980), pending before the 
Supreme Court as Nos. 80-1832, 80-2170 and 80-2171 (argued Feb. 22, 
1982). 
We strongly object to Section 3 of H.R. 6113 because of the 
importance of the constitutional issues raised by this provision. 
Concerning the other provisions of this bill, we defer to the 
other concerned agencies. 
The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is 
no objection to the submission of this report from the standpoint 
of the Administration's program. 
Sincerely, 
, nw ~= ff 
(Signed) Robert A. hic latices 
Robert A. McConnell 
Assistant Attorney General 
Mr. D’Amours. I have been requested by Mr. Forsythe that his 
statement be submitted for the record and, without objection, I will 
so order that the statement be submitted. I would also ask that the 
record be left open for any other opening statements of members 
who have been unable to attend due to other business, and that is 
also without objection; it is so ordered. 
[The statement of Mr. Forsythe follows:] 
STATEMENT OF Hon. EpwiIn B. ForsyTHE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE 
STATE OF NEW JERSEY 
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The proposed amendments are before our committee 
today for the purpose of receiving testimony on the collection of user fees to recover 
some of the costs associated with ocean dumping. 
In asking our staff to draft these amendments, I did not expect we would get the 
total concurrence of all our members on the provisions contained in the amend- 
ments and I still have a number of reservations about the proposed language 
myself. However, I am hopeful the testimony this afternoon will enable us to gain 
further insight on the issue of ocean dumping fees. 
There are many questions which still need to be answered as we proceed to act on 
any user fee legislation such as what costs should be recovered, who should pay 
ocean dumping user fees, should certain costs be shared by the Federal Government, 
how do we ensure that the monies collected will be used for the purposes intended? 
Also, is it appropriate to provide for some type of mechanism to allow for represen- 
tation from the dumpers themselves in making monitoring and research decisions? I 
hope we are able to answer some of these questions today. 
I welcome our distinguished colleagues from the Committee on Science and Tech- 
nology to today’s hearing and look forward to working with them in seeking solu- 
tions to the problems associated with funding the Ocean Dumping Act and the col- 
lection of user fees. 
Mr. D’Amours. Our first witness is Mr. Frederic Eidsness, Assist- 
ant Administrator for Water of the Environmental Protection 
Agency. I am going to ask that Capt. Lawrence Swanson, Director, 
Office of Marine Pollution Assessment, Office of Research and De- 
velopment of NOAA come to the table also. 
