426 



Mr. D' Amours. I am not sure I just heard properly. Are you 

 saying you don't anticipate there will be any problems in the deep 

 water sites — you think lease sale 42 data is sufficient upon which 

 to conclude, well, we don't expect any problems in deep water, so 

 why get into it? 



Mr. Danenberger. I think there are possibilities of problems if 

 there are some depositional zones where discharges might accumu- 

 late, or if there are some unusual features there. But I think if you 

 took just one deep water site as a study area, that in all probability 

 the effects would be less than a similar shallow water environment. 



Mr. D' Amours. Right. But that sounds a little cavalier to me. In 

 all probability — let's go ahead, after all Shell is keeping an eye out 

 for the environment. It just upsets me because it sounds, frankly, a 

 little bit cavalier. And again I don't mean to harangue. I mean to 

 be fair. 



Mr. Beller, do you have any thoughts on this? Are you as secure 

 as Interior seems to be that what we have discovered already in 

 the very limited sampling, in the exploration area, sale 42, is suffi- 

 cient upon which to take a laid-back attitude on deep water sites m 

 sale 52? 



Mr. Beller. I am not sure, in view of Interior's support of the 

 Biological Task Force with respect to Georges Bank, Interior has 

 done anything but try to support deep water work. 



I would point out that, based upon the work of lease sale 42, we 

 have, I quite agree, a limited number of samples which can be pro- 

 jected from having eight dry wells drilled, and that is all; there is 

 no projection possible at this time. 



When you get into deep water, you have different problems. 

 When you get down below the permanent thermocline at 400 

 meters, you have different types of organisms involved. 



I would point out that the organisms in the deep waters, unlike 

 those in the shallower waters, are not used to the stresses of being 

 close to the mainland. Consequently, they could be more easily 

 hurt by discharges that would be possibly innocuous in the shal- 

 lower waters. And these are the things we want to find out. 



Mr. D' Amours. I understand that Interior has been apparently 

 supporting the task force. But I think it is still relevant to consider 

 what Interior is apt to do henceforth. Interior apparently is going 

 to permit exploratory drilling off of Maryland, and allow, or trust 

 Shell to do the environmental work. It just seems to me that if In- 

 terior is committed to the process, and if the problems are different 

 as you suggest that they are, in deeper waters, that the Depart- 

 ment of the Interior, which is charged with looking after the public 

 interest in these areas, should be doing environmental work rather 

 than leaving that to the Shell Oil Co. 



Don't you agree with that, Mr. Beller? 



Mr. Beller. You put me in a difficult position in trying to evalu- 

 ate the Department of the Interior. 



Mr. D' Amours. Well, it is not my purpose to put you in a diffi- 

 cult position. But I think it is important that we arrive here at 

 some idea as to what direction we ought to be taking. This will 

 allow the subcommittee to go back and inform the full committee 

 and the U.S. Congress as to whether legislative remedies might be 

 called for here or whether we ought to restructure the Biological 



