172 



STATEMENT OF DR. NED A. OSTENSO, ASSISTANT ADMINIS- 

 TRATOR, OFFICE OF OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC RE- 

 SEARCH, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINIS- 

 TRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



Dr. OSTENSO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Your invitation to tes- 

 tify at this open hearing raises a concern that the reported con- 

 tamination of the Arctic by the former Soviet Union by radio- 

 nucUdes and other toxic substances could pose a serious risk to the 

 Arctic environment and its ecosystems. 



In recent months I have been represented and kept informed of 

 discussions on this matter by the staff of Interagency Arctic Re- 

 search Policy Committee, or lARPC, for which I am the Depart- 

 ment of Commerce representative. These discussions have been ad- 

 dressing the potential contamination by the FSU of the Arctic by 

 radionuclides and other toxic substances. It is evident, however, 

 that the major concern has focused on the radionuclide problem. 

 Although the claims of these contamination levels and their spatial 

 extent have not verified nor has measurement technologies and 

 other laboratory techniques used, the numbers that have been re- 

 ported for radioactivity and other contaminant levels provide cause 

 for concern from the standpoint of ecological and human health. 

 Furthermore, such concern is transboundary in nature because 

 such contaminants do not respect political and national boundaries. 

 However, in putting such concerns into perspective, it is important 

 not to overreact and to waste resources. It is imperative that £in as- 

 sessment of the problem be pursued in a phased manner that is 

 interdisciplinary in nature and coordinated with other Arctic ring 

 countries. Such an assessment should include a definition of the ex- 

 isting pertinent information; sources of former Soviet Union radio- 

 nuclides and other toxins directly introduced into the Russian Arc- 

 tic or transported to the Arctic via rivers, air trsinsport, through 

 precipitation; fates of radionuclides in the Russian Arctic, deter- 

 mined through modeling and observational measurements in the 

 water column, sediments and biota. We must know the effects of 

 the contaminants as determined at the organism, community, eco- 

 system and fishery, and human levels. We must have a definition 

 of policy implications. We must develop recommendations for ac- 

 tion, remedial measures and other studies. We must contemplate 

 logistic requirements, equipment requirements, and finally re- 

 source requirements. 



NCAA is working with lARPC to assess the degree of this poten- 

 tial problem and to take appropriate action with other agencies. As 

 you have alluded to, NOAA has a number of programs in the Arc- 

 tic, and I will list just a few of the ones that are salient. 



We have a marine mammal tissue archive, a national status and 

 trends program, a climate monitoring and diagnostic laboratory 

 station at Barrow. We operate two polar satellites. We conduct Arc- 

 tic Ocean circulation studies. We do Arctic air transport studies. 

 Our geophysical fluid dynamics laboratory modeling efforts are rel- 

 evant to the Arctic. We with the Navy run a Joint Ice Center. And 

 finally, we run the National and International Environmental Data 

 Centers. 



All of these programs have some scientific bearing on assessing 

 the potential of environmental risk due to contamination of the 



