226 



could reject a Federal development project that had been approved by 

 the appropriate State agency. 



This Department has participated actively in the efforts of the 

 marine commission and the marine council which are directly con- 

 cerned with the many problems of coastal zone management. On an 

 operational level, virtually all of the natural resource -managing bu- 

 reaus and offices of the Depaiitment of the Interior are actively engaged 

 in program activities in the estuarine and coastal zone. 



We recognize the great importance of the Nation's estuarine and 

 ■coastal zone. We are aware of the critical need for a soundly based na- 

 tional program to encourage and assist the coastal States of the Nation 

 in the effective management of the land, water, and other resources in 

 these areas. Thus, we concur in the basic objective of S. 2802 to estab- 

 lish a program for coastal management. We believe, however, that the 

 overall program described in S. 3183 will be more effective, sounder, 

 and comprehensive than that proposed in S. 2802. 



S. 3183, as proposed by this Department would establish a national 

 policy for the effective management and protection of the coastal zone. 

 To accomplish this policy, the bill will add a new section 19 to the 

 Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, to provide for a 

 cooperative program between the Federal and coastal State govern- 

 ments. Federal grants would be made to the coastal States on up to a 

 50-percent matching basis for developing a comprehensive manage- 

 ment program for the State's coastal zone. Operational grants could 

 «lso be made to the coastal State on a matching basis for implementa- 

 tion of the program. A requirement for the awarding of grants under 

 S. 3183 would be that the State be organized to implement the manage- 

 ment plan and that all necessary regulatory authorities are vested in 

 the implementing agency or agencies. This new section would provide 

 for a continuing review by the Secretary of the coastal State's perform- 

 ance under its program and provides for the power to terminate or 

 withdraw financial assistance in case of partial compliance or a failure 

 to comply. 



Under S. 2802, the coastal zone management progra,m would be 

 administered by the National Council on Marine Resources and Engi- 

 neering Development, a body established in the Executive Office of the 

 President and comprised of the Vice President of the United States 

 and eight (or nine if the Secretary of the Army were added to the 

 council as proposed in S. 2802) high-ranking representatives or heads 

 of Departments and agencies of the Government. All council actions 

 would be taken by majority vote of the council membership with the 

 Vice President authorized to cast an additional vote in cases of a tie. 



We seriously question the wisdom of assigning tlie responsibility 

 for administration of a coastal zone management program to the 

 council. We believe that the program should be administered by an 

 operating Department; preferably, the Department of the Interior, 

 which is presently engaged in existing programs in the estuarine and 

 coastal zone. 



We also believe that the approach taken in S. 3183 to funding the 

 estuarine and coast^al zone management program is preferable to the 

 proposal in S. 2802 which would designate a set amount of revenue 

 each year from the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act for a marine 

 resources fund. 



