592 



Research Lab in Narragansett, R.I., the so-called MERL facility, is 

 being phased out. 



Now, I question the wisdom of those moves for three reasons: 

 First, EPA thinks very highly of the facility, the MERL, and thinks 

 it will be useful in provi d i- g information on the effects of disposing 

 of radioactive wastes. Yet DOE support is being phased out. 



Second, it seems to me that the termination of research on ocean 

 disposal alternatives rather blatantly diregards the intent of Con- 

 gress, which was that research should continue, and, if anything, 

 be accelerated to determine the effects of low-level rad waste dis- 

 posal in the ocean. 



And, third, given what I sense to be DOE and EPA and perhaps 

 State Department disagreements here, there seems to be a lack of 

 coordination between the various agencies we find represented at 

 this table. 



So I would like to have any of you who would be willing address 

 that question for me, and I believe since DOE is primarily involved 

 here, Mr. Lawrence should begin. 



Mr. Lawrence. Thank you, since what you referred to, I do not 

 believe relates to the high level waste disposal program, I would 

 like to ask Mr. Baublitz, who is here from the low-level program to 

 address the question. 



Mr. D' Amours. That would be fine. 



STATEMENT OF JOHN E. BAUBLITZ 



Mr. Baublitz. Mr. Chairman, I am John Baublitz, Director of the 

 Division of Remedial Action Projects at DOE. I am representing 

 Dr. Franklin Coffman, who provided the statement for the record 

 on this subject. 



I can briefly summarize the situation. The program element that 

 was involved in this activity is called the formerly utilized sites re- 

 medial action program. It is a program aimed at identifying con- 

 tamination that exists as a result of old AEC and predecessor activ- 

 ities which now exceeds current standards and needs some kind of 

 remedial action treatment. 



One of the approaches to that kind of problem is to either stabi- 

 lize material where it currently exists, if that is feasible and suit- 

 able, or to move it to some other permanent disposal site. 



In the process of evaluating options for that program, the use of 

 ocean dumping of this material has been under consideration for a 

 couple of years. 



Over the past, approximately, 1 year, our efforts in that area 

 have been under review in the context of the current moratorium 

 and the current requirements that would follow the moratorium 

 for getting a permit. The climate that is associated with those ac- 

 tivities and our current need for long-range planning are such that 

 we believe we now have adequate information from the work that 

 has been completed to phase those studies out at this time for the 

 purposes of the formerly utilized site program. 



That has led to a decision recently to complete the activities that 

 are currently under way during fiscal year 1984. 



I might point out that this decision is in the context of an on- 

 going project, not in the sense of a research and development activ- 



