473 



-10- 



and, of course, the public. 



One example of the lack of coordination involves technology 

 transfers for packaging. EPA and the Navy are apparently looking 

 into packaging design for low-level waste ocean disposal, while 

 doe's SDP is examining packaging for high-level waste seabed 

 emplacement. These activities and others of this nature should, 

 at the very least, be discussed regularly in a common public 

 forum to avoid overlap and to identify areas where one party 

 might assist another. 



Concerning the matter of interagency coordination, we 

 believe that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

 rather than DOE, should be given the lead agency role for 

 coordinating the various non-regulatory ocean disposal program 

 activities. Pursuant to Public Law 95-273, NOAA has responsibility 

 for coordinating and monitoring federal agency activity related to 

 ocean pollution research, development and monitoring, with 

 particular emphasis on the inputs, fates, and effects of 

 pollutants in the marine environment. In this context, NOAA's 

 first five-year plan, which in part established priorities for 

 national needs and problems, ranked the disposal of radioactive 

 waste as a high priority concern. To date, NOAA's involvement 

 in seabed emplacement issues has been limited. It should, 

 however, have or be given the staff capabilities and resources 

 to perform such a lead agency coordination function. 



The perceived lack of communication and oversight in the 

 seabed disposal area is particularly troublesome in light of the 

 participation of SDP researchers and policy level officials 



