189 



on their logistical performance? We know their icebreaking capabil- 

 ity probably is second to none. 



Dr. O'DOWD. Senator, Russian science, at least in the part of the 

 world where I've been most active, has had access to a level of 

 logistical support that U.S. scientists are not accustomed to, in the 

 way of air transportation, helicopter transportation, and surface 

 transport. The academies have been able to command a great deal 

 of equipment, personnel, and energy to carry out their work. I 

 think the scientific equipment with which they work, in most cases, 

 is pretty primitive, but the transportation equipment and the stag- 

 ing areas that they have to work fi-om are really pretty good. I 

 think that we could count on a good deal of help at very modest 

 cost from Russians in pursuing work with them in measuring such 

 things as the transport of hazardous materials. I think Mead 

 Treadwell mentioned the other day, that he had a quote of $135 

 an hour for helicopter support in Russia as against something like 

 $2500 an hour for equivalent support in the U.S. So, funds will go 

 a long way, and I think we could do a great deal of study, and 

 gather a lot of valuable information quickly, using the support 

 structure that they have available. 



Senator Murkowski. Well, obviously their pricing is a Httle dif- 

 ferent than ours. I recall research ships in Vladivostok that could 

 be available for next to nothing they were so anxious to get some- 

 body to charter them, put some fuel in them and get under way. 



Let me move to Dr. Ostenso. I noted that NOAA did no radio- 

 nuclide monitoring in the Arctic but there were some 36 other 

 areas on the U.S. coast where monitoring did occur. Is it a matter 

 of money, because clearly I think this monitoring is needed in 

 areas off the Arctic coast of North America. 



Dr. Ostenso. Yes. Our program reflected out priorities based on 

 available resources. 



Senator Murkowski. Have you got any degree of comfort for us 

 relative to what your priorities are going to be in your next budget 

 presentation? 



Dr. Ostenso. God, 0MB and the Appropriation Committees will- 

 ing, we will be able to step up to the challenge. 



Senator Murkowski. Do you intend to recommend specifically 

 sites in the Arctic? 



Dr. Ostenso. Yes, I do. 



Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. Let me move to Admiral 

 Guimond. NOAA and EPA, of course, are the lead agencies for im- 

 plementing the AMAP program. And I'm curious to know what 

 you're planning with regard to your agency's budget for next year. 

 Are you going to implement an AMAP request in the budget? 



Admiral GuiMOND. We've put a request together in the program, 

 as with the other agencies, and depending upon how the appropria- 

 tions committees fare with the agency will determine where we go. 



Senator Murkowski. There's another area that doesn't affect nu- 

 clear waste, but the tremendous dumping at sea in the north Pa- 

 cific associated with the factory fish processors. As opposed to 

 shore-based plants that utilize virtually the entire biomass, the fac- 

 tory processors throw an awful lot over the side. And we're curious 

 whether EPA has a responsibility in this area and whether they^re 

 meeting that responsibility. 



