272 



tests were conducted outside these licensed dumpsites, and failed to include the 

 "High level" waste concrete blocks and drums. 



While we were discussing locating the actual dumpsites, I should mention, that 

 EPA has been trjdng to determine the actual disposal locations. Yet after six years 

 research, they have failed to list at least two sites I know of, one off the New Jersey 

 Coast at 41° 33' N latitude by 65° 30' W longitude, and a site off the California coast 

 at 37° 40' N latitude and 124° 50' W longitude licensed to the Military Sea Transpor- 

 tation Service in 1959. 



Which brings us to the military, probably the single largest nuclear waste dumper 

 in the country. 



Only a portion of the military's disposal operations even came under the purview 

 of the AEC. Any wastes generated from operations which are exempt from the 

 Commission's regulatory authority under Section 91(b) of the Atomic Energy Act, 

 are also exempt from the Commission's safeguards provided that the waste remains 

 in the possession of the military until the ultimate disposal. 



The Army shipped all of its waste material originating west of the Mississippi 

 River to the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah. According to their Standard Operat- 

 ing Procedures Manual, the material was then shipped to the U.S. Naval Radiologi- 

 cal Defense Laboratory, in San Francisco, which performs their ultimate disposal. 

 The wastes were much larger than we have been lead to believe, and possibly more 

 hazardous since they were not solely from the Navy's Laboratory experiments. 



But I am not sure anyone really knows what types of deadly readioactive materi- 

 als were disposed of in this manner. For example, the Nuclear Engineering Compa- 

 ny wanted to dispose of materials for the Air Force. In an April 1959 letter to the 

 AEC they stated "In many cases, the equipment being disposed of is obsolete, has 

 been at the originating site for years, and there are no longer any records available 

 indicating the type and quantity of isotope involved." 



How much waste was disposed of in the Pacific? I am not sure anyone knows. The 

 Air Force did not know their quantities, a 1957 Atomic Energy Commission report 

 (WASH-734) states that "the estimated curie content could be off as much as a 

 factor of 10." And under the curie content column of some of the company terminal 

 manifests we have reviewed are nothing but question marks. 



There are many unknowns. This is why I introduced H.R. 8119. We need a 

 comprehensive fish monitoring program to insure that these deadly wastes do not 

 make their way back to the human food chain through the fish. But in order to 

 fully protect those of us who like to eat fish, it is necessary to determine where 

 exactly the wastes are located, their concentration, and if the area being monitored 

 adequately represents all the waste dumpsites. 



If we were to implement such a monitoring program based upon the research 

 EPA has conducted to date, we would have no assurances that in 20 years a disposal 

 site which we were not monitoring would not be causing cancer among those 

 individuals who eat fish caught in this region. We could have a marine "Love 

 Canal." 



Thirty-five years ago man began the nuclear age with exploding the first atomic 

 bomb. Most of the material used in that first bomb will remain with us for the next 

 20,000 years. In my view, we must insure for future generations that the practices of 

 handling these volatile materials does not adversely affect the health and welfare of 

 this and future generations. Ladies and gentlemen, I submit the other alternative is 

 much too high a price for the human race to afford. 



To dispell any further notions that these drums were disposed of in the safest 

 possible manner I would like to read a section from the Naval Radiological Defense 

 Laboratory's application for renewal of their nuclear waste disposal license. It 

 summarizes the kind of care given to these drums. "After each dump, a thorough 

 inspection is made of the dump area to ascertain that all containers have sunk. In 

 the rare event of a floating radioactive waste container, it is sunk by gunfire." So 

 much for care in handling and making sure these wastes didn't float ashore. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Studds. Thank you very much, Mr. Congressman. 



What is the date of the last quotation? 



Mr. Anderson. From the radioactive disposal procedures, March 

 21, 1961, and it is quoted right here, in here, the area of dumping 

 approximately 55 miles northwest of San Francisco's Golden Gate 

 Bridge, "After each dump, a thorough inspection is made of the 

 dump area to ascertain that all containers have sunk. In the rare 

 event of a floating radioactive waste container, it is sunk by gun- 

 fire." 



