269 
a future incident involving the disposal of military materials in the 
waters. I have introduced this proposal in the House and it has been 
referred to another committee. I would hope, however, that the basis 
of the proposal could be incorporated in any legislation recommended 
by this subcommittee, under its jurisdiction regarding the Council on 
Environmental Quality. 
I would recommend that the Department of Defense be required to 
inventory all existing munitions, chemical, biological and radiological 
warfare agents, and other military material which may present any 
danger to man or to the environment. The Department would then 
determine the disposal date—the date beyond which each item cannot 
be safely retained—and the best means of disposing of each item, and 
submit this information to the Council on Environmental Quality for 
certification. 
Similarly, prior to the acquisition of any new munitions, the ulti- 
mate disposition of which will present a danger to man or to the 
environment, the Department of Defense would be required to fix 
the date beyond which such munition cannot be safely retained and 
determine the best means of disposing of such munition. This in- 
formation would then be submitted to the Council on Environmental 
Quality and to the Congress for approval—prior to the acquisition 
of such munition. 
It seems to me that the question of environmental] impact has to 
be determined either prior or simultaneously with acquisition. Other- 
wise, you are going to have overriding factors of need which will 
make environmental impact secondary. That is exactly what has 
happened to us under our present policy. That is the reason why, 
because of other urgent necessities, the military had no choice except 
to do what they did in this last dump. The committee had no choice 
but to go along with it, as did the American people and the world. 
It seems to me we can come up with a better system than that. I am 
not trying to tie the hands of the Department of Defense. Goodness 
knows they have enough problems. I think in some reasonable way 
this can be done. 
There may be arguments on determining a method of disposal 
or fixing the date beyond which a material may be held, because it 
might be difficult. However, we ought to try and do the best we can. 
I am sure the DOD with the right attitude can meet this problem 
and I am sure with the right attitude the Council on Environmental 
Quality is not going to unnecessarily hamstring them. 
This is a policy question which in my judgment does not belong 
in the Armed Services Committee, because the primary problem we 
are dealing with is environmental impact. Therefore, IT hope this 
committee will act under its jurisdiction to consider and act on that 
suggestion. 
There is one final bill I have, Mr. Chairman, which is not before 
this committee. It is before the committee where I am going to testify 
next, that is Foreign Affairs. It is a bill which would urge our 
Administration to advise the U.N. Preparatory Committee for the 
Stockholm Conference in 1972 to place on the agenda the establish- 
ment of an international mechanism which deals with the problem 
of dumping in the oceans. 
