components of cells and batteries and to understand selected electrochemical phenomena. We will concentrate on sodium-sulfur and zincbromine batteries, as well as battery testing and post-test analysis of other types of batteries. The sodium-sulfur battery has five times the energy storage capability of previous batteries. In the thermal storage area and mechanical energy storage, activities will focus on developing efficient, cost competitive processes for producing hydrogen from water and providing technology for safe and costeffective storage. Electric fields effects research and the electric energy systems will provide data on field exposures and determine methods for extrapolating data from laboratory animal experiments to apply to humans. Recent articles in the popular press concerned us all regarding certain forms of cancer related to magnetic field exposure which might result from the use of high voltage direct current transmission. Public concern is growing and research will be initiated to assess the validity of this concern. The superconducting transmission cable project will examine new insulating materials for use at ambient temperatures. Efforts will also be undertaken to assess the impact of a nuclear electromagnetic pulse on the Nation's electric network. These are just a few of the examples of what we are pursuing in new proposals and initiatives in the fiscal year 1985 budget, Mr. Chairman. In conclusion, let me say that I think the Department is acting in good faith with Congress. We have pledged to be receptive to the interests of this committee and the Senate as a whole. This program, I think, presents a good, long-term view of where we should be going in energy research. We are confident that these proposals will increase our understanding of the potential from virtually all renewable technologies, and we are very pleased by the input we have received from this committee. Thank you very much. Chairman HATFIELD. Thank you, Secretary Collins. ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND SAFETY PROGRAMS STATEMENT OF JAN W. MARES, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENT Chairman Hatfield. Mr. Mares. Mr. MARES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here with you today to discuss the Department's budget request for the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health. The Department's goal, as you know, is for all of its activities to be operated in a safe, healthy, and environmentally sound manner. The headquarters Office of Environment, Safety, and Health assists in this goal by establishing departmental policy, providing guidance, providing technical assistance to the line organization for implementation of that policy, and performs independent overview and assessments for the Secretary. I think the consequence of that activity on behalf of this Office is highlighted when we look at the charts I have provided, which show in a pictorial way the outstanding record regarding safety and health this Department had in 1983 and in previous years. [The charts referred to appear in Mr. Mares' prepared statement.] If we just leaf through, the first chart shows the accident incident rate which is about a third of what it is in the private sector. The second chart, lost workday incidence rate, is an indication of severity of incident, and DOE has substantially less than the private sector. The third chart deals with property loss, and its significance is that the DOE contractor property loss has been substantially less than the private sector, which is the line at the top of the page; the DOE average is the dash line in the middle of the page. The following three charts deal with radiation exposure of our people. In fact, none of the 1983 injuries or illnesses were caused by radiation exposure. There were no accidental exposures in excess of the various allowable limits. The first chart entitled "Radiation Dose" says the total exposure of our people through operations is about the same as received by those people in the natural background. The next chart shows how the number of our people that are receiving doses, in excess of either 1 rem or 2 rem per year, has steadily been dropping over the last 17 or 18 years. We expect that trend to continue. The final chart shows that the selective dose equivalent received by our people, who have received more than 1 rem has been steadily decreasing over the last 17 years. This is a reflection of the activities the Department has underway to strive to keep the radiation exposure of our people as low as reasonably achievable. BUDGET REQUEST From a funding standpoint in fiscal year 1985, we are requesting $37 million for the environment, safety, and health program, $5 million more than was appropriated in 1984. This increase is primarily in the nuclear safety area even though, as I just indicated, I think the Department's nuclear safety record has been outstanding. This increase is considered to be necessary to assure the continued excellent safety record, and also to improve upon it. One of the particular areas for which we seek these funds is the emergency response capabilities that would allow us to, on a remote basis, sense radiation through a narrow measurement system. That is the subject of these large charts which I brought. Today in the El Paso area, our resources are being deployed to try to find particles from a cobalt 60 medical source which was broken into and used in a foundry in Mexico. The metal products from that foundry have come into the United States. Our knowledge to date would indicate there is no public health hazard from any of those products. However, there is some indication some of the particles were radioactive and need to be found. We have some question as to whether they may have been brought across the border, carried either by the tires of vehicles or on the soles of peoples' feet. We have for the next 10 days a group of DOE em ployees and contract people using a radiation survey system. A helicopter flies over a precisely defined area using very sophisticated radiation measuring techniques, both to get the type of radiation and quantity of radiation. We then map that against a planner map which is matched to the course of the plane and is set by transponders sending radio signals to the plane. Then through computational techniques we can plot the maps. The examples of the maps are shown in the chart immediately in front of you. You can see what are called isoplats which would show where there is a higher level of radiation. With that information, people can go to the sites with hand-carried instruments that are about the size of a briefcase. The public health authorities find these individual particles, so we can then remove them and restore the surface to its natural state. That is one of the capabilities available to the Nation, and we have offered it to the Mexican authorities to use regarding these cobalt 60 particles that may not have been collected in the Juarez area. Another way this capability is used is as part of the Federal radiological monitoring assessment program. That is a program which was developed after TMI. In fact, we have a test underway today—the first test since TMI-at the St. Lucie nuclear powerplant wherein the Federal Government, NRC, FEMA, Department of Energy, State and local personnel, as well as Florida Power & Light Co. personnel, are testing the procedures that would be used in the event of a nuclear accident. The Department has deployed about 100 Department personnel and contractor personnel at that site, including representatives from all our operations offices. In fact, several of my staff and I are leaving this evening to go down and participate in the second day of that program. I think it is another example of the type of activity through which our Office works to assist both the Department and the country in dealing with nuclear safety matters. I think that the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health policy of independent overview has helped the Department to continue its excellent record of safety and health protection and environmental compliance. We look forward to continuing that and enhancing that program as a result of the budget request that we have made. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have, Mr. Chairman. Chairman HATFIELD. Are there any other statements to be made today? Mr. COLLINS. No, Mr. Chairman. PREPARED STATEMENT Chairman HATFIELD. Mr. Mares, your full statement will be made part of the record at this point. [The statement follows:] STATEMENT OF JAN W. MARES Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to be here today to discuss with you the Department's budget request for FY 1985 for the Office of Environment, Safety and Health. With me to assist in responding to your questions is Robert W. Davies, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health. NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY PLAN AND SAFE, ENVIRONMENTALLY The overall goal of our national energy policy is to foster an adequate supply of energy at reasonable costs. The two stra egies to achieve this goal are (1) to promote a balanced and mixed energy resource system and (2) to minimize federal control and involvement in energy markets while maintaining public health and safety and environmental quality. The Department of Energy implements these strategies through many programs involving diverse activities from research and development like magnetic fusion to process services like uranium enrichment. In addition, the Department is responsible for the manufacturing of nuclear weapons for national defense purposes. The DUE Organization Act establishes the Departmental goal of protecting and enhancing environmental quality and assuring public health and safety. Differently stated, the Department's goal is for all of its activities to be operated in a safe, healthy and environmentally sound manner. The Department's health and safety record has been outstanding by any standard. Its environmental record has also been good and there are no substantiated cases of impact on public health from the Department's operations, even though there have been occasional allegations to the contrary. The Department has always been a leader in environmental protection through its research activities to define and avoid adverse environmental impacts from its operations. The Department has also made continuing efforts to be in compliance with applicable 31-244 0 -84 - 17 environmental requirements as they have changed through the years. In fact, planning is currently underway to modify certain previously acceptable practices to meet current standards. The Headquarters Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) functions Thus the ES&H Office has overall responsibility for establishment and oversight of policy implementation by line organizations to assure safety and health of the workers and the public, and protection of the environment at DOE's operations. GOAL OF OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT SAFETY AND HEALTH The goal of the Office of Environment, Safety and Health is to assure safe and environmentally sound operation of DOE activities. (i) as appropriate reviews, assesses, appraises and in some supervision. The recent realignment of functional responsibilities within the |