578 
-20- 
NAS SOSMIEM a respect is shown for the potential hazards of 
radioactivity in the oceans. Admittedly, the NAS study generally 
concludes that "there is no evidence that the past and present 
policies and practices for radioactive waste disposal in the sea 
have jeopardized man or any marine species or ee ie 
While ocean dumping of radioactive wastes is only briefly addressed 
in the body of the study, that general conclusion was intended to 
apply to ocean dumping along with other disposal policies and 
practices. But that conclusion was premised on the statement that 
the guidelines in place in 1971 "are based on many factors, not 
all perfectly known, and are subject to change when new and better 
information becomes sya EBL age Since that study new and better 
information has become available, including the preliminary find- 
ings concerning rattail fish,. as well as EPA evidence of a 25 per- 
cent implosion rate for cannisters (contrary to the structural 
integrity presumption referred to in the NAS La eyeeee 
Given GAO's reliance on the National Academy of Sciences, 
it is curious that the Report makes no mention of two earlier 
NAS studies which were completed in 1959 and 1962 -- at the height 
Sly Mela SE Do 
52/ Id. Instead of referencing the general conclusion of the NAS 
Study, which was qualified as here quoted, the GAO Report paraphrased 
a more specific conclusion (at 275) that focused on effluent low-level 
discharges from power plants, distorting that conclusion to include 
"ocean" discharges. See, GAO Report, supra note 3, at 12. 
In the NAS study's limited discussion of ocean dumping, a similar 
concern with the need for better information is acknowledged in the 
authors' recommendation that previously used dumpsites will eventually 
need to be monitored in order "to safeguard users of the sea floor" 
(ie 35) 5 
53/ LGo. BE Bo 
