114 
ects to show that this is in fact a feasible way of dealing with sewage 
sludge. 
Mr. Frey. I think from the inflection of your remarks that you are 
a lot further along in the water thing in the terms of economics and 
everything than we are in the waste sludge. 
Dr. Srncer. That is correct, yes. 
Mr. Frey. That certainly is encouraging news. 
I do not have any other questions, Mr. Chairman. 
Dr. Stncrr. But I completely back Secretary Glasgow’s statement 
that we should not move precipitously on this matter because the 
coastal cities will be faced with an awful problem if suddenly regu- 
lations were to spring up that they could not fulfill. 
Mr. Frey. Such as regulations that they could not dump, you mean ? 
Dr. Stncer. If we prohibit dumping, period, without providing al- 
ternatives or sufficient time to develop alternatives, I think we would 
be falling short of our responsibilities. 
Mr. Frey. Let me ask you on that dumping, in your opinion, just 
from what you know about it, where should they be able to dump? 
Can you just by rule-of-thumb say there should be no dumping in the 
territorial seas or it should be 50 miles out, up in that area? 
Dr. Stncer. Let me answer this in two ways. . 
Asa matter of principle, I think we would say we are against dump- 
ing in the ocean. If alternatives can be developed, that is. 
We would, however, on an interim basis allow the type of dumping 
of materials that we feel reasonably certain are not causing any 1m- 
mediate and demonstrated adverse effects. We of course are against 
dumping of anything that causes adverse effects immediately. 
As far as the location is concerned, you mentioned the bill H.R. 
15905 and S. 3471. These are amendments to the Water Pollution Con- 
tro] Act. These bills would give the U.S. Government the broad au- 
thority which we do not have now to deal with this problem beyond 
the territorial sea. 
Dr. Guascow. I would like for Dr. Smith to comment on that same 
question if you do not mind. 
Mr. Frey. I would appreciate it. 
i Mr. Smrru. Yes. I would be essentially in agreement with Dr. Singer 
ere. 
It would be, I think; our recommendation that we should permit 
dumping of materials into the sea that can actually help the environ- 
ment, as Dr. Glasgow mentioned, by providing more nutrition or 
improving the habitat. Other than that, we would be basically op- 
posed to the dumping of material that would even disturb or alter 
a small portion of the environment. 
_I would like to also elaborate and point out that actually ocean pollu- 
tion or ocean dumping is part of a broader problem, it is part of a 
problem of waste management. If we properly recycle or reuse our 
waste products, perhaps we do not have to think about disposing of a 
great many of the materials that we are now thinking about having 
to get rid of in the ocean. So we have to look at this in terms of a broad 
waste management problem, not just ocean disposal or sewer outfalls, 
this or that. 
Mr. Frey. Thank you. 
