21 



run a little bit over half of the time. I don't know how much indul- 

 gence the chairman has for the panel to run over, but at this point, I 

 would like to open the meeting for questions. 

 Ladies and gentlemen, the floor is yours. 

 Dr. John C. Calhoun. I am Dr. John C. Calhoun. 

 Voice. Who is the individual ? Dr. Calhoun ? 



Dr. Calhoun. One of tlie representatives from the State of Texas. 

 I work for Texas A. & M. University. It seems to me a point of 

 clarification is desirable. I have read most of the stuff that the Com- 

 mission has published on this, but I am interested in the matter of 

 definitions. Do I understand when you say "coastal zone authority" 

 that you are talking aljout the outer boundary as being the coastal 

 water boundary? That is, you are talking about the waters and lands 

 within the 3-mile limit or its equivalent in those States that might 

 have a greater limit, but you are not talking about Continental Shelf 

 lands or Continental Shelf waters ? 



Dr. Knauss. When we discussed the problems of the coastal zone 

 we talked about the problems irrespective of jurisdiction. '\Ylien it 

 comes to the recommendations for State managed coastal zone authori- 

 ties, regardless of what some States might like to do to extend their 

 authority further seaward, the only thing we could possibly recom- 

 mend was State coastal zone authority over that area of water and 

 land over which the State has jurisdiction which at this time is 3 miles 

 for all States except Texas, and the West coast of Florida which has 

 9 miles. 



Mr. William H. Stoll. Bill Stoll, Texas. The Texas Legislature has 

 appropriated some funds for the State to begin a comprehensive coastal 

 planning program. I am very curious when you mention that some 

 funds will be available from the Federal Government in 1970 to 

 begin to establish some type of planning machinery within the coastal 

 and Great Lakes States.' My question is, has any thought been given 

 to what type of grants these funds will be used for? Will it be 50 

 percent, 100 percent funds? What is the thinking on approaching 

 this funding problem ? 



Dr. Knauss. We on the Commission made some recommendations 

 about matching funds. On tlie other hand, I think that this really is 

 now in the lap of the administration and Congress since they have 

 now made some decisions on this. I think Dr. Wenk should be allowed 

 to answer that question, if he will. 



Dr. Y\^ENK. Let me repeat again as I did at the outset, that you see 

 a clear and conspicuous similarity between the Administration's pro- 

 posals and the Commission's recommendations. Nevertheless there are 

 details of this kind that need yet to be worked out. It is my impression 

 that unquestionably this will be a matching fund grant, but it is also 

 my impression that some of the officials in Washington are of the 

 belief that the Federal share may be larger at the beginning and may 

 trend tovrard a 50-50 grant certainly in phase 2 of the planning. 

 These details will be worked out during the next 2 months, and al- 

 though it is presumptions on my part to forecast when the President 

 will transmit a proposal to the Congress, it is my guess that this will 

 be transmitted in January. 



I feel very sure that there will be consultation with representatives 

 of the States prior to tliat time to determine wliat makes sense. 



