100 



-10- 



— "any toxic waste, toxic waste constituent, or 

 toxic byproduct of waste interaction, is 

 consistently identified in toxic concentrations 

 above normal eunbient values outside the 

 disposal site more than four hours after 

 disposal ." 



— "solid waste material disposed of at the site 

 has accumulated at the site or in areas adjacent 

 to it, to such an extent that major areas of the 

 site or of adjacent areas are significantly 

 impaired and the Federal or State agency 

 responsible for regulating such use certifies 

 that such significant impairment has occurred 

 and states in its certificate the basis for its 

 determination of such impairment." 



The evidence for the existence of these and other impacts 

 at the 12-Mile Site and throughout the New York Bight Apex 

 has been compiled by a marine biologist on my staff. Dr. Paul 

 Ringold, and is appended to this testimony as EXHIBIT 1. 



Lastly, we believe there is merit in a proposal we made 

 to EPA on February 10, 1983' (attached as EXHIBIT 2) , which 

 would permit sewage sludge ocean dumping to continue on a 

 limited interim basis at the 12-Mile Site, but only if the 

 dumpers paid a "refundable user fee" for the privilege. This 

 fee would be based on the dumpers ' own estimates of the 

 increased costs of relocating their dumping to the 106-Mile 

 Site. Thus, the fee would be designed to eliminate any 

 economic advantage associated with ready access to a 

 convenient, nearshore ocean dumping site. We were pleased to 

 note that the "Special Dumping Fee" contemplated in the 

 Hughes-Forsythe proposal was designed on the basis of a 

 similar rationale and with a similar purpose. 



In short, although a comparison of the pros and cons of 

 continued sludge dumping at the 12-Mile Site versus a shift 



