743 
of the reasons that Mr. Borberg, representing the Conference on 
Coastal Agencies, testified in favor of the commission. 
Don’t you see some merit in this position, and if you do, do you 
see any alternative to a commission that might help to meet these 
concerns? 
Mr. Osann. I can certainly see his interest in advancing that po- 
sition. I think we all prefer to operate under conditions of certainty 
rather than conditions of uncertainty. The Congress could handle 
that problem, however, by establishing at the outset a fee that 
might be subject to later adjustment, either upward or downward. 
Mr. D’Amours. Given the current mindset, philosophy, or howev- 
er you might choose to describe EPA and NOAA’s ardor for con- 
trolling or monitoring polluters wherever or however they might 
be found, don’t you think a commission would help to fill a void? 
Mr. OsANnn. We think the fee would help to fill a void. 
Mr. D’Amours. But turning it over to the same people who in 
some instances, at least, philosophically don’t seem terribly in- 
clined to perform their mandate? 
Mr. Osann. The criticism that I think we have levied most 
strongly in a wide range of environmental programs is the lack of 
gusto in their regulatory functions, and our view is that a fee 
would begin to bring to bear some of the pressures, some of the lev- 
erage of the marketplace as a backstop to the regulatory activities 
of the agencies; not as a complete substitute, but as a backstop to 
those. 
Mr. D’Amours. You say you would bring that? 
Mr. OsANN. We see the fee as being an important backstop to the 
regulatory activities of the agencies. 
Mr. D’Amours. If there is no special commission what makes you 
think that they would perform any differently with these new fees 
than they do now? 
It is true that their research budgets are being cut back, but can 
you assume that this money will go to that end? 
Mr. Osann. Not necessarily, and in fact, we are not recommend- 
ing that the fees be established as a dedicated fund. What we are 
saying is that the effect of the fee structure in the marketplace on 
prospective dumpers will be to—— 
Mr. D’Amours. I see. So you see the fees not as a research aid 
and not as a way of encouraging NOAA or EPA to increase their 
research and monitoring, but only as a factor that might prohibit 
or discourage the alternative of ocean dumping? 
Mr. Osann. That is correct. 
Mr. D’Amovrs. I have no further questions at this time. 
Mr. Scheuer, do you have any questions of this witness? 
Mr. ScHEUER. No questions. 
Mr. D’Amours. Thank you very much, Mr. Osann, for your testi- 
mony and for waiting as long as you did to testify. 
There being no further witnesses or questions of witnesses, the 
subcommittees will stand adjourned. 
[The following was received for the record:] 
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY Mr. ForsYTHE AND ANSWERED BY EPA 
Question. How is the present monitoring program divided between EPA, NOAA, 
and the 102 permittees? 
