556 



tic Ocean [12], 



Earlier, in 1959, the U.S. Navy sank the compartment of the nuclear submarine Sea Wolf's 

 reactor, which had performed unsatisfactorily, 120 miles from the U.S. Atlantic coast. 



The foreign press has reported that nuclear warheads (NWH's) have been lost at sea aboard 

 an A-4 Skyhawk attack plane that fell off an aircraft carrier into the Pacific Ocean in December 

 1965, as well as those installed on two Thor missiles during unsuccessful launches from Johnston 

 Atoll in 1962. In March 1956, the U.S. Air Force lost a bomber over the Mediterranean Sea 

 carrying radioactive components for nuclear weapons, and in January 1966, a U.S. plane lost 4 

 hydrogen bombs, which fell into the Mediterranean near Palomares, Spain [14]. 



An incident with a U.S. NS in February 1980 off the coast of Scotland resulted in a discharge 

 of radioactive materials from a reactor cooling system [14]. 



Since 1977, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has performed radiological studies at 

 RW disposal sites in the northwestern Atlantic and in the Pacific [15]. 



In a number of cases, high levels of cesium and plutonium have been found in the immediate 

 neighborhood of dumped containers [13]. 



Japan dumped RW in the Pacific near its coast between 1956 and 1969. It performed 12 

 dumping operations at six sites. It dumped 3,03 1 containers (weight not specified), with a volume 

 of 606,200 m^, containing a total of 15,400 GBq (0.416 kCi) of activity. 



Analysis of all available information shows that official data furnished by 12 countries to the 

 IAEA [10] do not give a complete picture of RW dumpings at sea, especially after 1989. There is 

 little information on radionuclides that have entered the marine environment due to accidents and 

 disasters. 



1.3. Positions of Various Nations on Matters of Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea 



The problem of RW disposal in the world's oceans is being actively debated in the U.S. In 

 1992, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee conducted public hearings on the matter, during 

 which the possibility of activating international cooperation in the interests of reducing possible 

 dangerous consequences of such dumpings was discussed [16]. 



Most nations favor a ban on the disposal of all forms of RW at sea, considering the growing 

 concern in the world and in certain countries over contamination of the marine environment by 

 RW. This was the aim of a Danish initiative calling for a total ban on RW disposal at sea, and of 

 the idea, first advanced in 1983 within the framework of the London Convention, of a moratorium 

 on RW dumping at sea [4]. A resolution adopted at the time urged a refrain from disposal of all 

 forms and types of RW at sea until IGPRAD completes its work. As a result, the moratorium was 

 extended until the 16th Consultative Conference of signatories of the London Convention, which 

 is to be held in November 1993, with the understanding that by then IGPRAD will have comple- 

 ted its assessment and offered recommendations for disposal of intermediate- and low-level RW at 

 sea (the^SSR abstained from the vote on the moratorium resolution in 1985, and Russia has not 

 expressed a position on the matter). 



The U.S., France, Great Britain, and Japan take a special position on matters of RW disposal 

 at sea: they do not reject the idea of a moratorium per se, but insist on a transition period, during 

 which all questions of the handling, recycling, storage and land disposal of RW could be resolved. 



In answering the IAEA 1989 questionnaire, Belgium, Great Britain and Nauru have not given 

 a clear response on whether they plan to dispose of RW at sea in the future. Germany, Greece, 

 Italy, Canada, China, Mexico, Nauru, the Netheriands, the USSR, the U.S., and Finland stated at 



14 



