28 nr 2) CONTENTS 12 Deese, David, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.. 666 Grant, Hon. Lindsey, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, Hollister, Dr. Charles D., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. 507, 558 Liverman, Hon. James L., Assistant Administrator for Environment and Safety, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administra- Additional material submitted for the hearing record.. Anderson, D. R., et al., article entitled "Release Pathways for Deep Bowen, Vaughn T., article entitled, "Transuranic Elements and 965 Liverman, James L., Assistant Administrator for Environment and Safety, U.S. Energy Research and Development Strelow, Roger, Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--- Osterberg, C. L., article entitled, "Radiological Impacts of Releases Preston, A., article entitled, "The Radiological Consequences of Releases from Nuclear Facilities to the Aquatic Environment". Turner, Norma, article entitled, "Nuclear Waste Drop in the Ocean"- 998 964 795 RADIOLOGICAL CONTAMINATION OF THE OCEANS 1 MONDAY, JULY 26, 1976 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:44 a.m., pursuant to notice, in room. 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. John F. Seiberling presiding. Mr. SEIBERLING. The hearings of the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment are convened on matters pertaining to radiological contamination of the oceans. Today and tomorrow at this hour the subcommittee will conduct hearings on this subject. These hearings have been prompted in part by reports that past activities involving ocean disposal of radioactive wastes have resulted in leakage of radioactive materials into the marine environment. A second stimulus for our hearings is the public concern about the radiological contamination that might arise from the operation of floating nuclear powerplants. While the floating plant concept appears to be of sufficient promise to attract to it already a commitment of some tens of millions of dollars, certain questions concerning radiological hazards remain to be resolved. Of some interest in this regard is the fact that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 'Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards informed the Commission Chairman on June 7 of its reservation concerning floating nuclear plants, I quote from their statement: A question which still exists relates to the consequences of an accident which could result in the release of radioactive materials into the water. The committee wishes to withhold final judgment on the acceptability of the FNP, floating nuclear plant, application until the results on this question have been completed and evaluated. At today's hearing we will receive testimony describing past and ongoing dumping of radioactive waste by the United States and other countries. The subcommittee wants to know what kinds of ocean disposal might be undertaken in the future. We want to know what the various executive agencies are doing in order to insure that the need to protect the marine environment is given sufficient emphasis in policies and plans concerning ocean disposal of radioactive wastes. We are particularly concerned that international standards be sufficiently stringent. The first witnesses this morning will discuss international and institutional questions regarding ocean disposal of radioactive materials. (1) The second group of witnesses will address regulation of ocean disposal of radioactive wastes generated by this country's nuclear program. The last group will focus on ocean dumping by other nations and on ERDA's programs aimed at disposal of wastes under the ocean floor. Tomorrow we will receive testimony concerning floating nuclear powerplants. I would just like to add one other statement and that is that when we talk about protecting the environment we are not talking about protecting some abstraction that is, apart from man. We live in the environment and whether we continue to live as a race or perish will depend on whether that continues to be a livable environment. So in the end we are talking about protecting, not just the environment, but mankind. Our first scheduled witness is Mr. Lindsey Grant, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environmental and Population Affairs. Is Mr. Grant here yet? [No response.] Mr. SEIBERLING. Very well, I think we will then proceed with the next two witnesses on our schedule, Mr. Robert Stein, of the International Institute for Environment and Development; and Mr. David Deese of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Mr. Stein and Mr. Deese, if you would come forward I would like to ask them both to-one moment, please. Are you Mr. Grant, sir? Mr. GRANT. I am. Mr. SEIBERLING. I was just about to bring in the next witnesses ahead of you but since you are here we will proceed with you. We are ready if you are. STATEMENT OF LINDSEY GRANT, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND POPULATION AFFAIRS, ACCOMPANIED BY DEAN COOPER, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY AND ENERGY TECHNOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF STATE Mr. SEIBERLING. Do you have some people with you, Mr. Grant? Mr. GRANT. Yes; I would appreciate it if I could have Mr. Dean Cooper of our Office of Nuclear Energy and Energy Technology join me. Mr. SEIBERLING. Certainly. Mr. GRANT. Thank you. Mr. SEIBERLING. You may proceed when ready. Mr. GRANT. I am sorry to have held you up. You people are very sharp off the mark. Mr. SEIBERLING. That's quite all right, you haven't held us up very much. Mr. GRANT. Thank you for giving the Department of State an opportunity to appear before the subcommittee today to discuss the important subject of radioactive contamination of the oceans. I believe I might usefully review international activities, institutions and law relevant to your inquiry. In legal terms, the right to dispose of waste materials on the high seas is a traditional freedom of the high seas. However, under the 1958 Geneva Convention on the High Seas, this freedom, like all other freedoms of the seas, must be exercised with reasonable regard-not that "reasonable"-to other states' use of the oceans. In article 25 of that Convention, the international community specifically called on states to take measures to prevent pollution of the seas from the dumping of radioactive wastes. However, since there were no generally accepted standards, and none were provided by the 1958 Convention, the point at which radioactive pollution becomes "unreasonable" could not be established easily. Obviously, more specific controls were needed. During the 1950's the United States dumped containerized lowlevel radioactive waste into the sea under the close supervision of the old Atomic Energy Commission. We curtailed this program in 1962 and stopped it entirely in 1970. The President, in his February 1971, environmental message to Congress, recommended that the United States regulate its own ocean dumping of all harmful substances and take the initiative to develop international controls for the same purpose. This led to enactment of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, which prohibited ocean dumping of high-level radioactive waste. I won't discuss the act here, as I understand the Environmental Protection Agency will testify on it. Internationally, the United States in 1971 tabled a draft treaty on ocean dumping at the first meeting of an International Working Group on Marine Pollution which was formed to prepare for the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. After a complex series of negotiations, the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matters, which we abbreviate the London Dumping Convention, emerged in December 1972. The United States ratified the Dumping Convention in April 1974. The Convention came into force on August 30, 1975. The contracting parties, of which there are currently 26, will hold their first substantive consultative meeting September 20-24 of this year. How does the Convention apply to radioactive waste? It defines dumping as "any deliberate disposal at sea of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircraft, platforms or other manmade structures. . . ." Incidentally, this definition does not include the disposal at sea of materials arising from the normal operations of vessels, aircraft, platforms, et cetera, or from seabed mineral exploration and exploitation. Nor does it include the placement of matter for a purpose other than disposal. Annex I of the Convention contains a list of substances the dumping of which is entirely prohibited, including "high-level radioactive wastes or other high-level radioactive matter, defined on public health, biological or other grounds, by the competent international body in this field, at present the International Atomic Energy Agency, as unsuitable for dumping at sea." Annex II lists materials for which national authorities must issue special permits before they can be dumped, among them, "radioactive wastes and other radio |