670 



Additional Questions of Mr. Studds and Answered by Department of Energy 



Question 1: Let tne briefly review the background of the 



DOE budget for the subseabed disposal program, 

 as I understand it. Initially, DOE 

 contractors developed a plan and cost 

 projections for a multi-year program to 

 methodically study the feasibility of 

 subseabed emplacement of radioactive wastes. 

 The FY 8A cost proposal was $9.6M. The 

 Appropriation Committee report level was up to 

 that $9.6 level. The DOE has, however, only 

 included $7.6M in the program budget. Of the 

 $7.6M, only one project cited in your 

 testimony and funded at a $0.6M has a 

 component which assesses an aspect of 

 deep-water biology. 



Question 1. (a): What program elements were deleted (from the 

 $9.6M level to the $7.5M level) due to the 

 lower level of funding? How will this reduced 

 effort affect the time-table for completion of 

 the feasibility determination? 



Answer: The Department of Energy's original budget 



request for FY 198A for the Subseabed Disposal 

 Program was for $4.7 million; however. 

 Congressional action reported back a level of 

 spending of $9.6 million. As a result of that 

 Congressional action and based on our overall 

 program plans, we reassessed our plans. Based 

 on that reassessment, we bel-ieve that the 

 level of $7.5 million for FY 1984 is a 

 reasonable level to allow DOE to meet the 

 timetable of determining by 1990 the 

 feasibility of the subseabed concept. In 



