283 
ciated with the discharge of wastes into navigable waters of the United 
States and at sea. 
However, as I stated 2 months ago at hearings before your subeom- 
mittee on related bills, while short-term responses to the problem may 
hold appeal, our real need is for effective and workable long-term solu- 
tion which considers all aspects of the problem in context. 
At these earlier hearings, I mentioned the study of the New York 
Bight area begun as a project of the Corps of Engineers by the Sandy 
Took Marine Laboratory of the Department of the Interior in 1968, 
and the study we initiated in 1969, conducted by the Marine Science 
Research Center, State University of New York, to determine the 
chemical composition of the waste solids being deposited from the New 
York region into the ocean. I noted then that we are only beginning 
to identify the ecological effects of ocean dumping, and that compre- 
hensive new approaches are necessary if we are to manage this problem 
expeditiously and wisely. 
To accomplish this, the President has directed the Chairman of the 
Council on Environmental Quality to work with the Departments of 
the Interior, Army, other Federal agencies, and State and local govern- 
ments on a comprehensive study of ocean dumping which will recom- 
mend further research needs and appropriate legislation and adminis- 
trative action. 
I am informed that this study, together with recommendations for 
legislation, where needed, to control ocean dumping, will be transmit- 
ted to the President next week. Since the scope of this study, as we 
understand it, includes the items covered by these bills, it seems ap- 
propriate for us to defer our comments on the bills at this time. 
The other bill involved here is H.R. 19077, which would amend the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to require that the com- 
ments obtained from other Federal agencies and appropriate State 
agencies on the environmental impact of a proposed action be sought 
at least 120 days prior to the commencement of such action. Any recom- 
mendations received which are intended to minimize the impact on or 
enhance the quality of the environment of fish and wildlife would be 
required to be adopted by the agency taking the action. 
Mr. Chairman, we are not in a position to comment specifically on 
the need for an desirability of this legislative proposal, as not enough 
experience has been had yet under the National Environmental Policy 
Act. We feel that the existing procedures should be given a reasonable 
period of time to demonstrate their effectiveness prior to consideration 
of any proposal to change them. 
Mr. Chairman, this completes my statement. We will be pleased to 
answer any questions you may have. 
Mr. Dincett. Thank you very much, General. Mr. Everett. 
Mr. Evererr. General, the last statement you just made concerns 
with respect to the advance notice that would be required by any 
Federal department or agency planning to carry out a major Federal 
program that would affect the quality of our environment. Are you 
familiar with the recent ocean dumping of nerve gas? 
General Groves. I have read about it in the papers, yes, sir. 
Mr. Everett. As you will recall, the Department was only required 
to give the Congress 10 days’ advance notice prior to carrying out such 
56-788—71——__19 
