226 
See. 5B (a) also requires that the person wishing to dump sustain the “burden 
of proof’ that the materials that are dumped will not endanger the natural en- 
vironment of these waters and will meet any additional requirements as the 
Seeretary of the Interior deems necessary for the orderly regulation of such 
activity. Burden of proof does not require the person wishing to dump to prove 
beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials will be harmless. Rather, burden 
of proof requires a “preponderance of evidence” which demonstrates that the 
dumper can abide by the standards. I feel that placing the burden of proof on 
the dumper is an important factor in this legislation. It is time that those who 
wish to dispose of refuse material be required to assume the ecological conse- 
quences of their actions. I do not believe that the United States Government 
should be responsible for the expense of subsidizing the ocean dumping of 
private interests. 
In addition, this legislation takes into account the fact that in some locations 
materials can be dumped without harm to the ecology of the waters, whereas 
the same materials would be harmful to other areas. I have always felt that a 
unilateral prohibition against dumping was both unjust and unrealistic. Ocean 
currents in some areas will disperse most refuse material to the point where it 
does no harm. In other locations, however, the material may stagnate. The 
legislation also provides that different amounts of the same type of refuse may be 
dumped in different locations. Hach dumping site and material has its own partic- 
ular characteristics and these must be taken into account, as they will have to be 
by the person wishing to dump. There are, of course, certain materials such as 
mercury which would not be dumped at all. The standards set by the Secretary 
of the Interior and the burden of proof required of the dumper would effectively 
prohibit any dumping of such materials. Therefore, this section provides a flexible 
approach to the problem of dumping into the coastal waters. 
Section 5B (b) provides that the standards established by the Secretary of the 
Interior shall be adopted and applied to all Federal and State authorities which 
have the right to issue authorizations to discharge or deposit material into these 
waters. 
Sec. 5B (c) requires that the standards apply to all parts of the Federal and 
State governments and all persons who have authorization from the State or its 
agency to deposit or discharge such materials into these waters. 
Sec. 5B (d) permits the States to establish and enforce standards covering these 
activities within their jurisdiction only on the condition that the State standards 
are stricter than the Federal standards and that the States provide “adequate 
procedures for enforcement.” I believe this section is important because, aS we 
have seen in the case of automobile pollution, many states have wished to enact 
stricter regulations than the Federal ones but have been unable to do so because 
Federal law requires that the Federal standards apply. There is presently a bill 
before the Massachusetts Legislature to provide for the regulation of ocean 
dumping off the Massachusetts coast area. There may be similar bills before 
other State legislatures. Therefore, a provision such as the one in this section is 
necessary to permit State regulation under controlled circumstances. 
Src. 5B (e) provides that every State and Federal instrumentality and every 
person applying for authorization to discharge or otherwise dispose of any 
material into these waters maintain records, make reports and provide what- 
ever additional information the Secretary of the Interior needs to determine 
that the standards are being complied with. The Secretary may also, upon re- 
quest, have access to these records. 
Sec. 5B (f) provides that the district courts of the United States have juris- 
diction to restrain violations of this Act. The courts have subpoena power and 
auure to obey the subpoena may be punishable by a charge of contempt of 
court. 
Sec. 5B (g) provides that each violation of these standards shall be punish- 
able by a fine of not more than $10,000 nor less than $5,000. This means that 
each time refuse is dumped in violation of the standards, the violator is liable 
for this fine. In many cases, several dumpings or discharges occur per day and 
each instance is a violation punishable by the fine. 
Sec. 5B (h) terminates any existing authorizations for dumping issued by 
the United States under any other provision of law as of the enactment of this 
bill into law. 
Mr. Chairman, if we continue this dumping into our coastal waters, not only 
will we seriously endanger our own lives, but we will have to spend billions 
