*Does not include commercial waste management, but includes domestic spent fuel storage of $3,000,000 in fiscal year 1979.

*Includes terminal storage and waste processing R. & D.

*Includes only terminal storage and waste processing R. & D.

STATEMENT OF JAMES L. LIVERMAN, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
ENVIRONMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to have this opportunity to discuss with your the Office of Environment's ocean bed emplacement program. I would like to begin my discussion with the general responsibilities of the Assistant Sectretary for the Environment in terms of the Department of Energy Waste Management Programs, the concept of ocean bed emplacement, and the relationship with other Federal and International Agencies regarding the development and evaluation of the sub-seabed emplacement alternative for nuclear waste disposal. I will conclude with the technical status of DOE's ocean bed emplacement program.

The Office of Environment is responsible for providing guidance to the Secretary on Department-wide compliance with environmental laws and procedures as well as on health and safety issues related to DOE programs. In this role the Assistant Secretary for the Environment conducts comprehensive research and development to determine possible environmental effects and safety of radioactive waste management technologies and systems. The Assistant Secretary for Energy Technology is responsible for the development and operation of Commercial Waste Management Facilities.

The major thrust of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Commercial Waste Management Program under the Assistant Secretary for Energy Technology is towards the isolation of the wastes within stable geological formations at depths reachable by conventional mining methods. The geologic formations of primary interest are bedded salt, salt domes and anticlines, basalt, shales and granites.

The existence of deep-sea technology, such as deep seabed drilling, bore hole reentry, and deep-sea emplacement and recovery of large equipment, makes it possible to consider the geological formations beneath the deep oceans as alternative formations for radioactive waste isolation. The basic concept for emplacement is that radioactive wastes will be put within a blanket of deep ocean sediments which are stable and have accumulated over millions of years and are in the process of becoming sedimentary rock. Such a protective blanket might provide perpetual isolation of the wastes. However, the feasibility of the concept of sub-seabed emplacement of radioactive waste needs to be established. Therefore, the Ocean Bed Emplacement Program, under the Assistant Secretary for Environment, is considered a long-range concept for waste isolation. While having a potential for future use, it is still in the evaluation stage at this time.

The near-term objective of the Ocean Bed Emplacement Program is to determine whether the deep ocean sediments are an effective barrier for the confinement and isolation of suitably treated and packaged high-level radioactive wastes emplaced within the geologically stable and biologically inactive regions of the deep ocean floor. The research efforts are primarily focused on oceanographic, radiation and thermal effects investigations directed towards a thorough understanding of the barriers to radionuclide migration. Research results will provide evidence on whether the sediments are an adequate barrier to radionuclide migration and the presence of the radioactive material will adversely affect the environment of the seabed. A secondary purpose of the current program is to maintain the capability of assessing similar evaluaton programs developed by other countries. In short, the environmental feasibility of the concept is being examined.

Several Federal and International Agencies have responsibilities for radioactive waste management. The Department of Energy, under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, has responsibility for developing the technology for and the management of designated radioactive waste shipped to the Federal Government. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, has responsibility for the licensing of "facilities used primarily for the receipt and storage of high-level radioactive wastes resulting from activities licensed under such Act and other facilities authorized for the express purpose of subsequent long-term storage of high-level radioactive waste generated by the Administration, ." The Environmental Protection Agency has responsibility for establishing guidelines on radioactive materials released to the environment, and under the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, has responsibility for the regulation of disposal of material in the ocean. It is my understanding an EPA permit would be required for deep seabed emplacement

of wastes.

On an international level DOE participates with the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) of the Organization for Econonmic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in a Seabed Working Group which I will discuss later under the technical description of seabed emplacement programs.

In the general area of radioactive waste control, DOE provides technical advice and participates with the State Department, EPA, NRC, and other Federal agencies in developing U.S. positions for participation in agreements, such as the London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, and with the International Atomic Energy Agency in its responsibility for Definitions and Recommendations regarding radioactive wastes under the London Convention.

I would now like to outline the technical status of the Ocean Bed Emplacement Program and international cooperation on the concept. The investigations began in 1974 and are presently concentrating on the mid-gyre, mid-tectonic plate regions of the North Pacific and North Atlantic oceans. Detailed assessments are being made of: The deep ocean sediments as a barrier to radionuclide migration; Vertical and horizontal consistency of the sediments;

Heat and heat tranfer effects;

Characteristics of biological communities in the ocean depth; and
Possible biological transfer and interactions of radionuclides.

Technical program management is provided by Sandia Laboratories, in conjunction with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and the University of Rhode Island. Other participating organizations include Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, University of Washington, University of New Mexico, Harvard University, and Princeton University.

Within the near-term planning period of 1978 to 1983, the major objectives are to acquire oceanographic, biological, and sedimentologic data to establish that the deep sediments in isolated regions of the ocean floor are an effective barrier to the dispersal of radionuclides from suitably emplaced waste. Provided that feasibility of sediment as a barrier is established, appropriate data would be accumulated to allow further consideration of the seabed emplacement option.

During 1974, the first year of this program, general oceanic areas were identified for consideration for seabed emplacement, and initial investigations were undertaken. It was concluded that the water column or depth, i.e., the mass of water extending from the seabed to the surface in the mid-gyre regions (about 15,000 to 20,000 feet deep), should not be considered as a primary barrier or as the medium for the disposal of the high-level wastes.

During the second year, research emphasis shifted from the water column to the mid-tectonic plate, mid-ocean gyre sediment and natural processes in these sediments. Based on the results, a more comprehensive investigation began to assess the ocean bottom sediments as a disposal medium and primary barrier to the migration of radioactive waste.

In October 1976, a 41⁄2-inch diameter, 80 foot-long core sample of the sediments was acquired from a study area about 600 miles north of Hawaii in the middle of the central North Pacific. This core provided samples of a major section of the sediment column for geotechnical, chemical, and microbiological laboratory analyses and a first-hand look at the geologic history of the region, as well as an opportunity to correlate remotely acquired geophysical data with the realities of the geologic structure. Analysis of these date indicate that the sediments have been stable for about 70 million years. No surprises or anomalies have been found which would preclude the use of the sediments as a confinement medium. Initial laboratory work with samples of the deep ocean red clays and selected radioactive chemicals has shown the clays to have very favorable retention properties.

Activities of the program currently underway include: (1) development of a number of analytical models as part of the overall systems analysis effort; (2) evaluation of the sorption properties of the sediments; (3) assessment of the thermal problems associated with the heat produced by the waste and the impact of this heat upon the physical and chemical properties of the sediments; (4) continuation of the characterization and environmental predictability studies of the sediments; (5) development of analytical and laboratory capabilities to investigate waste canister emplacement techniques; (6) corrosion studies to evaluate potential canister materials; (7) biological investigations in support of assessment studies addressing accident scenarios and environmental impact; and (8) development of an international program of scientific investigations and information exchange. Figure 1 shows the project's historical funding level and request for fiscal year 1979.

Other nations are moving rapidly ahead with nuclear technology but are not as fortunate as the U.S. in having available relatively large, sparsely populated, land masses containing geological formations potentially suitable for disposal of highlevel waste products of that technology. Since seabed emplacement may eventually be a technical viable alternative to land masses for ultimate waste disposal and

since there are many international implications of such a system, a basis for international cooperation and interchange of information and data is being developed with other interested countries.

A seabed working group has been established as an informal subgroup of the OECD/NEA, Radioactive Waste Management Committee-Canada, Japan, France, United Kingdom, and the United States are currently participating. The purposes of this group are to: provide a forum for discussions, assessment of progress, and planning of future R&D efforts; encourage and coordinate cooperative research vessel cruises and experiments; share facilities and test equipment; and maintain cognizance of international policy issues. Specific topical areas of cooperation include physical oceanography, waste form and canister development, biological characterization, sediment and rock assessment, site characterizations, and systems analysis.

In conclusion, I would reiterate that ocean bed emplacement is still in the evaluation stage. Some of the scientific highlights to date include the identification of geologically stable, remote areas which have no apparent present or future biological or mineral resources. Other ocean regions, such as fracture zones, trenches, or great river deltas, have been suggested for assessment because they offer hope for fast burial by natural process. These areas have initially been down-graded, because they are tectonically or otherwise unstable, and sedimentation is not predictable. The "mid-plate, mid-gyre" regions are large, and initial results to date show the sediments are uniform and predictable over large areas.

We do know there are potential advantages and disadvantages associated with ocean bed emplacement. Some of the potential advantages include: the remoteness from human activities, the high confinement capability of ocean sediments, the high heat sink capability of the ocean, the large area available, and the possible international solution for long-term waste management. Some of the potential disadvantages of the concept are: the present day difficulty in monitoring and retrievability; the added port, ship and ocean transport requirements; the concept acceptability, contrary to trends of existing international laws and agreements; and the need for demonstrations of emplacement techniques.

If you have any questions, my staff and I are available to provide answers. Dr. D. R. Anderson, Seabed Project Manager, from Sandia Laboratories, and Dr. David Deese, Harvard University, have prepared testimony on additional technical details of the program and trends in International laws and agreements using the ocean and seabed as disposal media.

1Funds provided by the Division of Military Application and the Office of Naval Research.

NOTE. From fiscal year 1975 through fiscal year 1979 the total funding has been by DOE.

STATEMENT OF JOHN M. DEUTCH, DIRECTOR OF ENERGY
RESEARCH, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Dr. DEUTCH. I am John Deutch, Mr. Chairman.
With your permission, let me report on two facts.

First of all, Jim Liverman seems to be stuck in traffic and is on his way here.

I will lead off the Department of Energy testimony, to be followed by Mr. Liverman, assuming that he makes it here in time. He is stuck in traffic, so with your permission, sir-

Mr. BREAUX. I understand. The same thing happened to me this morning.

We welcome you.

Dr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to submit my prepared remarks for the record and just speak for a few moments about some of the broad aspects of the administration's efforts in radioactive waste management policy.

I believe that the committee in its letter of invitation to us requested certain discussion of the steps the administration is taking in radioactive waste management. If that is agreeable to you, sir, I will proceed.

Mr. BREAUX. Without objection, it is made part of the testimony. Dr. DEUTCH. Thank you, sir.

Both the Department of Energy, the administration, and other concerned Government agencies place the highest importance on improving our record and our performance in radioactive waste management problems.

There are a variety of radioactive wastes. I will try here today to cover the status and issues bearing on each type, ranging from uranium mill tailings, through low-level wastes, transuranic wastes, high-level defense wastes, and commercial spent fuel.

In addition, we recognize that the problem of radioactive waste management has an important international dimension. It involves the concerns of other nations, as well as our own. We have a stake not only in responsible and effective waste management in the United States, but for other nations of the world as well.

The national energy plan called for a major administration review of our radioactive waste management programs. Late last year, the Secretary of Energy asked me to lead an intradepartmental review of the radioactive waste management programs of the department. That review was intended to be a diagnosis, as opposed to a cure, for some of the problems that confront us.

In March of this year the Department released the results of the report, Review of Waste Management, conducted by the Department of Energy under my chairmanship.

On the same day, President Carter announced the formation of an interagency task force, where representatives of essentially all interested Government agencies, ranging from the Department of State to NOAA and EPA, were to participate in establishing policy, programs, and mission assignments in the area of radioactive waste management.

That interagency task force is due to report its findings on October 1, 1978. We anticipate that this will be a first step toward a cure of some of the problems that face us.

Now, with that background about what the administration is doing, I would like to say a few remarks about the salient findings of the Department of Energy task force review of waste management programs.

While these findings do not commit the Department or the administration to any particular set of programs or policies, the findings are serving as the basis of the inquiry underway by the interagency task force.

First and most important, perhaps, we found that the majority of independent technical experts have concluded that high-level wastes or spent fuel can be safely disposed in geological media, but that validation of specific technical choices bearing on geological

33-546 - 78 - 14