562 
the course of this paper, we consider the GAO analysis to be 
incomplete and its principal conclusions to be defective. We 
find that: 
@ the incomplete and inaccurate information that 
Plague the issue of past ocean dumping of nuclear 
waste presents a serious problem which requires 
more complete elaboration in order to determine 
actual or potential hazards; 
e there is not enough hard evidence to provide 
sufficient certainty that public health and en- 
vironmental hazards will not result from past 
dumping practices; 
@ a good monitoring program of previously used 
Sites off the U.S. coastline is both necessary 
and useful (1) to provide empirical data con- 
cerning such matters as toxicity, transport, 
and critical pathways, fates and effects of the 
radioactive materials, (2) to assure the public 
that such past dumping does not present any 
public health or environmental hazards, and (3) 
to provide scientific data which will contribute 
to responsible policies and regulatory require- 
ments) fon the future; and 
e a good monitoring program of "test" sites off the 
U.S. coastline, unmodified by prior dumping acti- 
vities, is both necessary and useful (1) to pro- 
vide baseline data that will increase our knowledge 
of the physical, geochemical and biological processes 
of the marine environment and routes back to man; and 
(2) to provide scientific data which will contribute 
to responsible policies and regulatory requirements 
for the future. 
A discussion of each of these findings follows, presented in the 
context of Sen. Roth's request and the GAO's findings and con- 
clusions. 
