264 



Mr. Kyros. Because, you know, one of the problems we hear aibout 

 is the fact that numerous plants are planning to set themselves up 

 along the coastlines, because of the available cooling sea water. And I 

 just wanted to know, apart from the radioactive waste you have al- 

 ready discussed, what would happen with the problem of thermal 

 pollution, if it is as great as we believe it to be ? 



Mr. Ramey. This would come under the States and the Environ- 

 mental Protection Agency, under their water pollution standards. 



Mr. Kyros. This would not be within the jurisdiction of your agency 

 in other words ? 



Mr. Eamey. Only as I say, where the Commission, under the NEPA 

 and the Muskie act, conditions its license on meeting the State and 

 Federal requirements. 



Mr. Kyros. Thank you very much. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Mr. Everett. 



Mr. Everett. One question, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Ramey, will you supply for the record the Atomic Energy Com- 

 mission's regulations mentioned on page 2 of your statements? 



Mr. Ramey. Yes, I will be glad to. 



(Tlie information follows:) 



The attached copies of AEO regulations— 10 CFR Parts 2, 20, 30, 40 and 70— 

 were referred to by Commissioner Ramey las those which related to the receipt, 

 use and disposal of source, special nuclear and bjrproduct material. It should be 

 noted that there are no specific references in any of these regulations to the 

 ocean dumping of radioactive waste. (The regulations were placed in the files 

 of the committee.) 



Mr. Everett. One final question. I was wondering, with respect to 

 7 (b) , if you give us any indication as to the number of permits for 

 ocean dumping of material we might be talking about in the future? 



Mr. Ramey. We will be glad to do this. I would say there will be 

 very few. 



Mr. EvEREiT. But you will supply that for the record? 



Mr. Ramey. Certainly. 



(The information follows:) 



All routine dumping of radioactive Wastes into the ocean was, for all practical 

 purposes, discontinued in 1962, when two commercial land buirial facilities com- 

 menced operations. The few remaining licenses, referred to previously, are being 

 phased out. We do not have plans for issuing licenses for ocean disposal of radio- 

 active material in the foreseeable future and we hiave no intention of dumping 

 any such material from our own operations. Thus, the number of permits for 

 ocean disposal of radioactive material will be zero. 



We believe, however, it does not follow that a complete prohibition of ocean 

 disposal is indicated. Until more is linown about the environmental effects of 

 other types of waste disposal, it is not in the national interest to make a de- 

 cision at this time which would foreclose a particular disposal, in the future, of 

 radioactive waste under proper conditions and controls in some part of the ocean. 

 We have no way of estimating at this time the frequency which such proposals 

 would be made and, if made, favorably considered. 



Mr. Everett. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Mr. Commissioner, could you tell us, in matters like 

 ocean dumping, what has been the practice of the Atomic Energy 

 Commission ? 



Have you given public notice, and had hearings, or have you simply 

 issued permits to dump? 



Mr. Ramey. Mr. Price, do you want to comment on this? 



