162 



the Department of the Interior and its statutory rights to make the 

 determination with respect to these leases ^Yhich are so inextricably 

 tied to our po\Yer resources that we all have a reason to care for. 



I think it is an orderly approach. You have to walk up the hill and 

 down the hill and go around the hill before a designation can ever be 

 made. 



Certainly, even the Governors of the respective States have quite an 

 input into this proposal in this particular title. 



As a matter of fact, the Governors of the States, before the expir- 

 ation of a 60-day period, must certify to the Secretary that a specified 

 portion thereof is unacceptable and the Secretary cannot issue a per- 

 mit until the Governor withdraws the certificate of unacceptability. 



We tried to bring into that legislation a cooperation we have not 

 had before with the States and with the political subdivisions that 

 might be involved. 



I did not mean to interrupt you, sir. I wanted to call your attention 

 to that language on page 47, lines 5 through 19 of the bill, talking 

 about the bill relating to marine sanctuaries, title III. 



Well, I do not want to unduly delay you, sir, in discussing some- 

 thing that is really not before this subcommittee ; but I thought this 

 would be proper since we had not had the opportunity to talk with 

 anybody and I was getting different messages, none of them official 

 exactly, that you hope to get this language changed and designate 

 the Secretary of the Interior to make the decision as regards marine 

 sanctuaries. 



I question the wisdom of that. If you are going to have a National 

 Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency, I doubt that the Depart- 

 ment of the Interior should make the selection of marine sanctuaries. 



The Department of the Interior is inextricably related to the coastal 

 zones, but in the minds of most people, that is the Department of 

 Commerce is primarily involved in designating marine sanctuaries. 



Any other questions? 



JVIr. Counsel ? 



Mr. Hetwood. Mr. Secretary, in connection with the marine sanctu- 

 ary problem, I noticed in your statement on H.R. 9229, that you say 

 it would be inappropriate to embark upon the Federal regulatory 

 scheme, and so forth, within the context of legislation designed to 

 assist the coastal States in the exercise of their land-management 

 responsibilities. 



It seems to me in that statement that you are not really recognizing 

 the purposes of H.R. 9229. Repeatedly in the findings of section 302, 

 the bill addresses itself to water management responsibilities. As a 

 matter of fact, the initiation of this bill came from a consideration by 

 the Marine Science Commission, which was concerned with oceanic 

 management in that part of the coastal zone which related to water 

 resources, particularly the competing uses tliat were threatening the 

 living marine resources of the coastal zone. 



Now, obviously, in any bill, whichever way it starts, the land mass 

 along the coast is obviously going to have to be coordinated, that is, 

 the management of it, with the water resources, whether we talk about 

 land use or whether we talk about water use. But as I review the 

 administration reports and testimony from the administration wit- 

 nesses, I see that they continue to talk about land management. 



