34 



pal sludges not now dumped. However, the "burden of proof that 

 such dumping will not "unreasonably degrade" the environment is 

 entirely on the applicant. 



It would be a heavy burden of proof to demonstrate why the 

 land-based alternative could not continue to be used in the future. 



We conclude by saying that through combined efforts to substan- 

 tially improve the estuary, to provide alternative disposal sites for 

 contaminated dredged materials, and our efforts to resolve the 

 sewage sludge and other ocean dumping issues, we believe that a 

 substantial improvement in both the estuary and the bight apex is 

 attainable, and we are actively working toward that goal. 



The second conclusion is that the 106-mile site is environmental- 

 ly acceptable for receipt of sewage sludges. The administrative 

 processes have been initiated to deal with the question of the 12- 

 mile site and the 106-mile site. 



Finally, I wish to emphasize that the site designation and permit 

 issuance are two separate and independent processes. Site designa- 

 tion is a process by which it is determined that a given area of the 

 ocean is acceptable for receipt of a particular waste. 



The permit issuance is the process by which it is determined on a 

 case-by-case basis that an applicant has demonstrated the need for 

 ocean dumping and that it is environmentally acceptable. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and obviously. Dr. Anderson and I 

 will be pleased to respond to any questions. 



[The statement of Mr. Schatzow follows:] 



