QUESTION: Michael May, associate director at large at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, has written in Science magazine that "powerful but presently or soon to be available laser systems.... could damage a satellite from 100 to 1000 kilometers away. Satellites in relatively low orbits could be damaged by such systems based on the ground." In view of this, as well as the considerable anti-satellite capability inherent in any SDI system, wouldn't it be extremely difficult to assure the survivability of any space-based SDI component? How could we thus have any confidence in the shielding ability of any SDI system which uses space-based components?

(U) The question of survivability of space based components of the Strategic Defense Initiative must be addressed at the system or architectural level. Unhardened satellites, like today's space systems, could be destroyed by powerful ground based lasers. However, there are a number of concepts being pursued by the SDI that hold the promise of providing the necessary level of system survivability for any future strategic defenses.

(U) The net result is that when looked at from a system perspective, there are several techniques available to the Strategic Defense planner to achieve acceptable system level survivability against very powerful ground based lasers used as ASAT weapons.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: We thank you for the opportunity to present our views on a matter of vital importance to states and compact regions responsible for developing a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.

Between now and January 1, 1993, the task of siting and developing several new low-level waste disposal facilities must be completed. But the technological and political issues facing states and compact regions are enormous. This is especially true where the type of facility previously used (shallow land burial) is prohibited or politically unacceptable. Thus, at the same time that studies are being performed to find suitable locations for new facilities, substantial work must also be done to evaluate alternative technological approaches for disposing of low-level radioactive waste.

The extent to which progress is made during the next few years will determine whether a new nationwide system of low-level waste management can be achieved. Technical and financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is critical to the success of this effort. DOE has already begun

(760)

Page Two

Low-level waste

to facilitate states' efforts by issuing grants for studies related to national low-level waste issues, such as siting and disposal technology evaluation. In addition, the DOE low-level radioactive waste management program, operated by its primary contractor, EG&G Idaho, has a national computer network which includes economic models for evaluating site development and waste disposal costs, waste disposal data for individual states, and a low-level waste manifest tracking system. DOE is also helping sponsor a national coordinating committee for evaluating alternative disposal technologies, has sponsored public participation workshops, has assisted states in developing programs which will facilitate adequate siting schedules and has published numerous proceedings and information documents related to low-level waste management including the annual state-by-state assessment of low-level waste disposal, waste minimization procedures and case histories of local cooperation and incentives.

The financial and technical resources available for completing the tasks required by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 are limited, particularly during the critical two-year period just ahead, and they must be used efficiently. DOE can promote this efficiency through the types of activities described above. Sufficient time is not available for each state and region to engage in a "trial and error" approach to evaluating technologies and developing siting procedures. With DOE's assistance, individual states and regions can build on the knowledge of others, and they will not be required to perform these analyses independently.

Page Three

Low-level waste

a

Unfortunately, at time when DOE's assistance is most critical, appropriations for the low-level waste program continue to be reduced. The funding level of $6.2 million for Fiscal Year 1985 was reduced to $4.65 million for Fiscal Year 1986. A further reduction (to $4.0 million) is proposed for Fiscal Year 1987. States such as Illinois and Texas, each of which has made significant progress toward developing a new facility, have already felt the impact of reductions in DOE's budget. In each case, the states have been told by DOE that grants previously approved for assisting in the development of new facilities will be available, but at reduced levels, and that no additional assistance to the states will be granted under the funding level proposed in the president's budget.

We strongly urge Congress to reject the proposal by the DOE to reduce the funding level for the low-level waste program. Continued reductions will make the assistance on which states had intended to rely unlikely, if not impossible. This is particularly true in light of recent provisions which were included in the Low-Level Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985. These provisions place new responsibilities on the Department of Energy including:

1. Conducting a year-long study on "above class 'C' wastes" and "assuming responsibility for such wastes";

2. Managing the allocation of 800,000 cubic feet of disposal capacity provided to utilities for unusual operating eventualities;

H

Page Four

Low-level waste

3. Managing an escrow account, comprised of 25% of the surcharges that will be rebated to the states and compacts upon achieving specific milestones; and

4. Producing an annual report of the progress of states and regions in meeting the deadlines in the Act and on industry's procedures for handling low-level waste.

Each of these new responsibilities must be funded out of DOE's low-level waste budget which means that the limited resources available to states from DOE will be reduced even further.

While we recognize that the responsibility for implementing a low-level waste management and disposal system now rests with the states, such a system cannot be implemented without full cooperation and assistance from the Federal government. We are convinced that if the Federal government's level of conmmitment is reduced at this critical juncture, successful implementation of the system will be placed in serious jeopardy. The cost of failure will be high since if the States are not successful, responsibility for low-level waste may shift to the Federal government. I think you would agree that this outcome would be an unfortunate and costly result.

For these reasons, we urge the Congress to increase the amount available for the DOE's Low-level waste program in FY87.