233 



production of 117 million cubic feet per year — 3,683,106 wet tons 

 per year. 



Yet, your actual 1982 sludge production based on EPA informa- 

 tion was 3,206,000 wet tons, almost a half million wet tons less. 

 That difference results in a $2.3 million overestimation. 



Are you familiar first of all with the EPA information and can 

 this be reconciled? 



Mr. McGouGH. I am not familiar with the specific figures you 

 refer to. Again I would say we would attempt to reconcile the fig- 

 ures for record. 



Your point is that there was an overestimation? 



Mr. D' Amours. Yes. There was an overestimation of about rough- 

 ly a half million wet tons as I calculate in my head, and given the 

 figures you are using in your testimony it would be a $2.3 million 

 difference. 



Mr. McGouGH. Let me make the point, wet tons is a hard thing 

 to deal with. We have had programs in the city to try to reduce the 

 wet tonnage, take the water out in order to cut the transportation 

 costs. We have used thermophilic digestion and other methods to 

 reduce it. That might account for some of this. 



Mr. D' Amours. The conversion we make is according to the con- 

 version factor that you supplied EPA and the committee in "Tech- 

 nical Information To Support the Redesignation of the 12-Mile Site 

 for the Ocean Disposal of Municipal Sewage Sludge." We are using 

 your conversion factor. 



Mr. McGouGH. Percent solids is the most important thing. 



Mr. D' Amours. Yes. 



Mr. McGouGH. If you reduce the water it doesn't make a lot of 

 difference, it is the solid content that matters. 



Mr. D' Amours. We will leave the record open for that point. 



My time has expired but I have one final point. The objection 

 you have to any possible transfer of sludge dumping from the 12- 

 mile site to the 106-mile site 



Mayor Koch. It is environmentally degraded, you get two bights 

 instead of one, both degrading the ocean. 



Mr. D' Amours. I agree, Ed, you were not here earlier but your 

 staff was here and maybe they made you aware that NOAA indi- 

 cated a preference for closing the 12-mile site and turning to the 

 106-mile site and EPA came about as close to making that same 

 suggestion as I have ever heard them come. 



Anyway you say in your testimony to let the scientific facts 

 speak for themselves. We will have to do that. 



I will now then recognize the ranking committee minority 

 member, Mr. Ed Forsythe from New Jersey. 



Mr. Forsythe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Welcome again, Mr. Mayor. 



Mayor Koch. Thank you. 



Mr. Forsythe. With respect to the question on sludge volume, I 

 believe, Mr. McGough, you said you were doing dewatering now. 

 Obviously, by dealing in dry tons we would be talking using equiva- 

 lent measures. 



But do you think it would be worthwhile to pursue dewatering so 

 that transported sludge volume would be substantially reduced? 



28-914 0-84 16 



