286 
refuse into navigable waters of the United States be under permit 
from the corps. Until fairly recently—well, let me point out there is 
very little dumping within the territorial limits of the United States. 
Virtually none. It is all beyond the limits. 
Mr. Dinertu. That statute says that no person shall deposit any- 
thing other than liquids or runoff from rivers, streets, and highways 
into the navigable waters of the United States. If you cruise up or 
down any river or along any coastline of any lake, you will find 
industrial outfall after industrial outfall. 
General Grovzs. That is correct. 
Mr. Drncetu. Your agency has done nothing about this. Mr. Reuss’ 
subcommittee got into it and it finally became plain that the law as 
written did cover all these people. Then I understand your agency and 
some of the U.S. attorneys’ offices around the country began to do 
something about persons who violated that particular law. 
My question to you at this time is what is now going on, insofar as 
enforcement of that statute is concerned and what is the policy of the 
administration on the enforcement of that procedural statute? I am 
aware there are some slight differences between your agency now and 
the Attorney General who I understand doesn’t want to enforce it. 
General Groves. In my earlier answer I was responding only in the 
context of ocean dumping. The broader question of just placement of 
any type of refuse—mainly through outfall, as you describe, is that 
we are now requiring permits on all discharges into the navigable 
waters of the United States. The procedures and policies that we will 
follow in the interim period deal with people for instance who have 
one that has been there for a long time, or one who doesn’t have a per- 
mit. What do we do with him; these procedures are being developed 
right now. It involves many agencies, many departments—not only 
the corps and Justice, but there are others also involved. 
Mr. Dincett. There is no question that it is a clear violation of law? 
General Groves. There is no question. The question is what you are 
going to do about it and this is what is being negotiated. 
Mr. Dixceuu. The law says it will cost them $2,500 a day. 
Have you come in for any legislative relief? Each day constituting, 
as I understand it, a separate violation ? 
General Groves. To answer your question, sir, to my knowledge we 
have not come in. We are discussing it at the interagency level. I would 
expect that out of this will come proposed legislation. 
Mr. Dincetu. Has your agency submitted its section 103 policy state- 
ment as to how you bring your policies into conformity with the re- 
quirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and how your 
fundamental statutes should be changed to conform with the policy 
statement of that statute? 
General Groves. The Corps of Engineers has done so, yes, sir. 
Mr. Drncetu. You have submitted the section 103 statement ? 
General Groves. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Dincetn. Can you tell us what that 103 statement says with 
regard to dumping and the violation of the Refuse Act of 1899 ? 
General Groves. I am unable to answer that at the moment. I will be 
happy to provide a copy for the record. | 
Mr. Dinertu. That would be most appreciated, if you please. 
