614 



-11- 



program, including targeted field surveys of past dumpsites and 



test sites (which would be selected as part of the program 



development) , and (2) to submit a report on the results of that 



program to Congress, prior to the conclusion of such extended 



moratorium. Given federal agency reluctance to undertake further 



research, such amendments would provide federal officials with 



clearer moratorium guidance, including program end-points for 



budget purposes. The extended moratorium also would allow 



adequate time to budget the necessary federal resources, and to 



perform needed field studies and analyses so that the outstanding 



questions can be answered in a systematic fashion. In addition, 



an extended moratorium would enable U.S. officials to review the 



information, analyses and findings that are expected under the 



international scientific review that is presently in process. 



Our request for the development of a research and monitoring 



program is not novel. General requirements for such a program 



already are contained in Title II (Section 1443) of the Ocean 



Dumping Act. Unfortunately, though, the Act does not provide any 



specific guidance in relation to radioactive wastes. As is well 



known, at this Subcommittee's last general oversight hearing on 



radioactive waste disposal, held in November 1980, EPA and NOAA 



officials advised the Subcommittee that such a program would be 



developed. As stated by one of EPA's witnesses at that hearing 



(Dr. Roger Mattson) : 



Both NOAA and EPA are committed to developing a 

 monitoring strategy, and high priority is being 

 given to the development of a concise, mutually 

 agreeable, statement of purposes and costs for 

 the ocean monitoring of radioactive materials. 



