459 



Let me now turn to low-level radioactive waste at existing dispos- 

 al sites. Over the past decade, NOAA's pollution research and 

 monitoring priorities have been directed, based on what we consid- 

 er to be the best available scientific opinion, toward those pollut- 

 ants entering the marine environment that are known to pose, or 

 are believed to pose, the most significant threat to human health, 

 living resources, and environmental quality. Because the evidence 

 so far indicates that radionuclides pose a lesser threat than other 

 pollutants, NOAA has not placed a high priority on research con- 

 cerning low-level nuclear wastes. I would like to summarize for you 

 the scientific evidence and deliberations which led to that manage- 

 ment decision. 



In 1971, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that in 

 terms of ecological effects, the consensus of the scientific literature 

 at that time was that radionuclides are not likely to be significant- 

 ly deleterious in populations of marine organisms at the dose rates 

 estimated for the most contaminated enviroments. Based on what 

 we know now, that is the conclusions of scientists, the National 

 Academy also concluded that no evidence existed showing that past 

 ocean disposal of low-level waste had jeopardized humans or any 

 marine species. 



In 1978, a workshop of scientific experts met, under NOAA's 

 auspices, in Estes Park, Colo., to review the status of our scientific 

 knowledge on all ocean pollution issues and to recommend areas 

 where further study was necessary. These experts concluded that 

 to date no impacts on human health have been documented from 

 the ocean disposal of radionuclides and no effects harmful to 

 marine organisms are known, even at the sites of large discharges. 

 The workshop did recommend, however, that existing low-level 

 radioactive waste dumpsites should be watched for leakage of ra- 

 dionuclides to test the validity of present data about retention of 

 disposed materials in sediments, and to provide a basis for the 

 selection of future disposal areas for radioactive waste, low level, if 

 that should occur. 



In 1979 NOAA issued the first 5-year Federal plan under the 

 National Ocean Pollution Planning Act. The plan, which was devel- 

 oped in cooperation with all concerned Federal agencies, evaluated 

 the full range of known ocean pollution problems and assigned 

 priorities, and identified high priority, unmet needs. The monitor- 

 ing of existing radioactive waste dumpsites was considered to be a 

 medium to high priority information need. A need was perceived 

 primarily for assessment of residual radionuclide abundance and 

 recovery rates in order to evaluate future requests for ocean dispos- 

 al of low-level wastes. 



Given this backdrop of scientific opinion on the relative threat 

 posed to human health and living marine resources, and — let me 

 underline this, even though it's not underlined in my testimony — 

 the limited amount of ocean pollution research funding available, 

 NOAA has not assigned a high priority to monitoring radionuclides 

 at existing dumpsites. Instead, NOAA's pollution research and 

 monitoring have focused on those areas where there is a strong 

 scientific consensus as to the magnitude of the pollution problem, 

 such as the problems that are associated with toxic organic materi- 

 als. 



69-848 - 81 - 30 



