563 



posal of high-level radioactive waste in about three miles of water; 

 and depending upon the penetrator method chosen, the waste 

 would be actually sunk between 100 to 400 feet into the ocean sedi- 

 ment, in which case the ocean sediment will close in around the 

 waste providing a barrier for any release of the radioactivity to the 

 environment. 



The objectives of the program at this time are first and foremost 

 to determine the feasibility of this concept. Based upon the draw- 

 ing I have shown and the brief description I have just given, it cer- 

 tainly looks very simplistic, but obviously there is a lot of technol- 

 ogy involved with this. The determination of feasibility will be 

 based upon — 



First, finding if there is a suitable site for such a concept; 



Second, whether or not it can be implemented safely; 



Third, determining if the radiological and environmental effects 

 of such disposal are, in fact, acceptable; and 



Fourth, determining if the institutional impediments to such dis- 

 posal can be overcome. 



The second objective of our program is to continue the interna- 

 tional cooperation which has been going on in this program since 

 1977. Although mined geologic repositories on land are the primary 

 thrust of the U.S. program, we recognize that other countries with 

 high-level radioactive waste will be needing disposal facilities, and 

 this represents certainly an interesting option for them, which 

 should be explored if the United States wants to maintain its pres- 

 ence in this research. 



Finally, we want to maintain the subseabed disposal option as a 

 viable alternative for the U.S. program as well, for possible dispos- 

 al facilities which may be required subsequent to our development 

 of mined geologic repositories. 



Turning to your specific interest in what the institutional issues 

 may be in the subseabed program, on the national level certainly 

 the Marine Protection and Research and Sanctuaries Act which 

 was passed does bear on this. We recognize that before the United 

 States could engage in any program to actively dispose of high 

 level radioactive waste on an operational basis that congressional 

 action would be required and authorization would have to be ob- 

 tained from Congress. 



On the international level, the London Dumping Convention also 

 addresses this question. Deputy Assistant Secretary Hughes men- 

 tioned earlier in her testimony that in December an ad hoc meet- 

 ing of legal experts will meet in London to discuss the London 

 Dumping Convention's impact on that activity. 



Finally, turning toward the Department of Energy's budget for 

 the subseabed disposal program, I have also prepared a chart 

 which shows the historical funding level of the program from 1975 

 to 1984, with the U.S. funding level in the hatched bottom part of 

 the bars. 



As you can see, the United States has represented and provided 

 a major portion of the funding for this program over the years. Out 

 of a cumulative total of about $89 million through 1984, approxi- 

 mately half, or $43 million, has come from U.S. funding. It is our 

 intent that this funding level should be brought more in line with 

 the larger share of the funding coming from foreign sources, but as 



