485 



The Center for Law and Social Policy has addressed issues relat- 

 ed to the ocean disposal of radioactive waste on numerous occa- 

 sions during recent years. In my prepared testimony I have set 

 forth a number of those instances where we have been involved in 

 both domestic and international activities. 



These hearings represent a useful contribution to the United 

 States' efforts to formulate sound and rational controls related to 

 the potential disposal of radiological wastes in the oceans. I ap- 

 plaud your decision in this intersessional period to convene these 

 hearings and bring before this subcommittee the various agencies 

 that are involved. I think there is this continuing need to try and 

 bring out of the nooks and crannies of our different Government 

 programs articulated public statements as to what is happening in 

 programs that could have a significant influence on future activi- 

 ties in this area. 



Mr. Studds. Thank you. "Intersessional" sounds much better 

 than "lame duck." I like that. [Laughter.] 



Mr. Curtis. I tried to euphemistically deal with your problem. 



Finally, I indicated that the public airing of this country's efforts 

 is essential, given the national debate which is continuing over the 

 appropriateness of nuclear technology, and that the public must be 

 kept informed as to matters that affect the viability of continued 

 reliance on the use of nuclear power. Waste disposal is certainly 

 one of the critical issues. 



The recent citizen outcry over possible health and environmental 

 hazards resulting from previous U.S. dumping operations off the 

 California coast also illustrates the need for informing and involv- 

 ing the public on these issues. Hearings held last month concerning 

 the Farallon Islands radioactive waste dumping pointedly demon- 

 strated how the Government's failure to attend to the public had 

 contributed significantly to the growing sense of alarm. 



In my prepared testimony I have set forth several generic consid- 

 erations about the amount of dumping that has been done in the 

 past, and projected dumpings according to some Department of 

 Energy calculations. I will leave that as stated in my prepared 

 testimony. 



I will state, though, orally, after putting into my prepared state- 

 ment the description of how many cubic meters of low-level/high- 

 level transuranic wastes and the metric tons of commercial spent 

 fuel, I decided I would try to relate that to something more under- 

 standable for me. 



So, looking at it in the context of football fields, we found that 

 the low-level wastes, the 8 million cubic meters, if placed on a 

 football field, would rise to almost a mile high, 4,375 feet. The 

 transuranic wastes, if placed on a football field, would be about 457 

 feet high, this stack of wastes. And for the high-level wastes, a 

 stack of waste material 175 feet high. 



At present there exists a consensus within the United States that 

 the ocean alternative is not a viable disposal medium for high-level 

 radioactive wastes. You have heard that in the testmony of others 

 today. 



Similarly, ocean disposal of low-level radioactive wastes is not 

 considered an environmentally or economically preferable disposal 

 medium. However, as Bud Walsh indicated just a few moments 



