270 



later. Additionally, I can conceive of no way that oil could be dispersed or 

 collected once it reached the marsh. Unquestionably, it would have to be inter- 

 cepted offshore before it reached this envrionment. The time it would take for the 

 environment to recover after a spill would be variable depending on the tidal 

 and wind conditions at the time of occurrence. We are not in a position to 

 estimate what this time might be. It is an area of badly needed research. 



We feel strongly that your recommendation that the Academy of Science initi- 

 ate studies preceding oil leasing action is a solid one. Yet, at this point in time, I 

 doubt that the group could do more than guess, as I have above, on the environ- 

 mental impact of a major oil disaster. 

 Sincerely, 



David Menzel, Director. 



(Commonwealth of Vikginia, 

 Virginia Institute of Marine Science, 



Wachapreague, Va., January 20, 1972. 

 Senator Edward M. Kennedy, 

 U.S. Senate, 

 Washinffton, B.C. 



Dear Sir : I received your letter of January 14 regarding environmental risks 

 attendant to offshore oil drilling in the Atlantic. Needless to say, the past per- 

 formance of the oil industry has given good reason for expecting catastrophic 

 problems to the local environment. This obviously should not be. An oil well, 

 working properly, without fire, spills, blowouts, etc., should cause relatively little 

 damage to the environment. I am inclined to think that good tough legislation, 

 with teeth, could force the oil companies to use techniques that would prevent 

 problems. If a company knew that a fine would be assessed for every square acre 

 of oil pollution per day, plus the cost of clean up, I believe they would take special 

 pains to prevent spills and blowouts. The oil companies should realize their 

 responsibilities to maintain a clean environment. The costs of failure should be so 

 great that no short-cut methods could be considered. 



Provided proper legislation and safeguards are in force, I would rather see 

 oil wells off our Atlantic coast instead of an oil line across Alaska. 



I am in favor of a two year moratorium on establishment of marine sanctuaries. 

 This is well worthwhile. I wonder if perhaps a study on conservation of fossil 

 fuels might be just as important. It is unfortunate that a tax could not be im- 

 posed that would increase with increased use of oil ; for instance a tax of 7^ per 

 gallon for the first 1000 gallons and double with each succeeding 1000 gallon 

 unit 



Thank you for your letter. I hope this information is of some value. 

 Sincerely, 



Michael Castagna, 



Scientist in Charge. 



Environmental Defense Fund, 

 East SetattJcet, N.Y., January 21, 1972. 

 Senator Edward M. Kennedy, 

 U.S. Senate, 

 Washington, D.C. 



Dear Senator Kennedy : Thank you for your letter of January 14th in which 

 you discussed the Interior Department's plans to lease oil drilling rights along 

 the Atlantic coastline. 



Although the Environmental Defense Fund is not yet involved in legal action 

 to oppose such exploitation of offshore oil resources, we are certainly not in 

 favor of the plan. With almost daily news items announcing oil spills, beach 

 contamination, and wildlife mortality due to floating oil, we believe that much 

 improvement in the technology for producing and transporting petroleum prod- 

 ucts is necessary before the Atlantic shoreline should be exposed to the consid- 

 erable risks inherent in offshore oil drilling. 



I believe the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York City is very 

 much concerned with the offshore oil drilling problem, and I suggest that you 

 might wish to contact them as well as our own organization in this connection. 



We certainly are in favor of the efforts you are making to protect the Atlantic 



