259 
They have to give notice, is that correct ? 
Mr. Rocrrs. I would think so. It is a military installation. If it has 
an adverse effect, I would think they should, although I am not sure 
how many are doing it. I doubt if this is really being done by any of 
your military installations. 
Mr. Downtne. The problem is what are you going to do with this 
refuse. You have to get rid of it in some way. 
Mr. Rogers. What we are saying is that we are going to put dead- 
lines. It will take some time, for instance, for all primary treatment. 
In other words, that will bring it to a certain degree of treatment, but 
not as much as we would like, but at least it would set a goal of requir- 
ing any dumpings in the water to have primary treatment by 1972. 
By 1974, secondary treatment would be required, which is about a 90- 
percent treatment. In fact, some of it even goes a little more than 90 
percent. Tertiary treatment, we hope, will go to 95 or 98 percent, treat- 
ment. 
Mr. Downrne. Is technology available for treatment of al] refuse? 
Mr. Roegrs. Technology is available. Then we also give authority 
as you know in these bills for the Secretary to prohibit the dumping 
of particularly hazardous materials or those materials that cannot 
be handled with primary treatment. So you would have the authority 
really to begin to clean up. For waste that can be treated we provide 
that it must be treated. For waste that cannot be, the Secretary says 
you cannot dump it at all. 
Mr. Downtne. The practical problem arises, what are you going to 
do with it ? . 
Mr. Rocers. There are going to be a number of things they are going 
to do, just as they are doing now with mercury. They are making 
changes. Simply by requiring this treatment, it is going to bring some 
technology and advances that we have not had before. A lot of this 
can be reused. You are going to find, just like in our solid waste prob- 
lem, an emphasis on recycling of materials so that these wastes can 
be distilled, recovered, and reused. 
I read just recently how easy it is to recover—in fact, I think it was 
‘mercury—which can be easily recovered and there is no reason why 
it should not be reused. It is also an economic advantage to the com- 
pany if they will do it. Unless we begin to say this has to be done, no 
one is going to do it. This is what we have to come to and face up to. 
The time is passing. 
Mr. Downtne. You will recall when we were holding the special 
hearings on the CWS nerve gas agent there was evidence that this 
could be practically done at the Atomic Energy site. 
Mr. Rogers. Of course, it could. They are demilitarizing, as you 
know, all of the little gas bomblets with nerve gas. They are doing this. 
Unfortunately, they put this in cement which complicated this 
problem. 
Mr. Downtne. I thank the gentleman and again compliment him on 
a fine job. 
Mr. Rocers. Thank you. 
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 
Mr. Dincett. Mr. Rogers, we wish to commend you. 
The Chair would now like to call a very able member of this sub- 
committee, the Honorable Frank Annunzio. 
