Mr. TRAIN. I think the point that we were essentially trying to make is that these possibilities, and we agree that they are very remote, are not considered and taken into account by the Department of the Army in its environmental impact statement to the Council. As I pointed out, the statement only considers the environmental impact after the hulk has reached the bottom. We believe this is a deficiency. There are these possibilities, which even though very remote and which I would assume wouldn't change the situation in anyway at all, still should be brought to the attention of reviewing agencies, such as the Council, yourself, and the public.

Senator SPONG. I quite agree with that. I did not ask the question with any idea of suggesting that they have any other alternative at the moment. But I think it's important that you said this and that all of us understand that it really isn't quite as simple as it's been presented.

Now, secondly, I think it's important because the Lord is moving in very mysterious ways. The oil pollution legislation was locked up in that conference until the Tampa Bay spill. I say that without any hesitation. I certainly hope that nothing is going to happen with regard to this, but I think we all ought to know the possibilities, no matter how remote they are, and I think what you and Dr. Sanders have done here today is a great service because I think all of us ought to begin saying that there is a great deal more research needed immediately in this vast area before anything comparable to this is dumped into the ocean.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. TRAIN. At the same time, I would reiterate the statement of the Gross report which I have accepted, that is to the effect that inaction increases the hazards.

Senator HOLLINGS. Right; that's why we move it as promptly as

we can.

Senator Cook?

Senator Cook. Mr. Train, I appreciate your remark on page 2, "while the Council has not completed its study of ocean dumping, we have already concluded it is clearly inappropriate to use the ocean for the disposal of any toxic material." I am wondering if the Council might consider lifting this one phrase out of its report and making his recommendation to the White House at this time rather than wait until September 1? The reason I say this is that between now and September 1, and between now and whenever the report may be accepted, that much of this may take place. I am wondering if the Council would give serious consideration to the importance of this statement and make such a recommendation in advance.

Mr. TRAIN. We would certainly be very glad to consider that, Senator.

There are problems, as I know you're aware, of definitions of toxic substance and problems of quantity, of accidental spills and things of that sort. Now, this has proved a difficult subject to deal with in connection with the recent oil spill legislation, as you know. And I would have some uncertainty whether we could hasten this up prior to September 1, which, after all is only 3 weeks away.

Senator Cook. The only reason I ask you this is because we are talking about a liquid gas that can be assimilated in the ocean at a very rapid rate.

Now, conceivably, we could be talking about other toxic materials that are being dumped into the ocean that cannot be assimilated in as rapid a manner. And the only reason I bring this up is that we're talking about the use of the bottom of the ocean for all purposes and not just for this. And the desire of this committee is to see to it that we put a stop to this at all levels.

Was any consideration given by your Council or by the U.S. Department of Public Health that it would be conceivable to encase these vaults in a decontaminating material during their removal throughout the United States and to the east coast?

Mr. TRAIN. It was not considered by our Council.

Whether it was considered by the Surgeon General, I do not know. As I indicated in my testimony, transportation was not covered by the impact statement, and we essentially accepted the judgment of the Surgeon General on the safety and health implications of the transportation aspects of this project.

Senator Cook. In your statement you say "In any event, we have had available to us the opinion of the Surgeon General to the effect any health or safety effects involved in the transportation are negligible, particularly in view of the precautions planned by the Army." Yet, the report shows these are in a very unstable condition; that they could start a chain reaction of explosions with some 30 or more rockets encased in one unit and yet apparently the Surgeon General feels that even if this chain reaction mignt take place, there will be adequate detoxification facilities available. I'm wondering why no consideration was given to encasing these units in a detoxification material during their transportation through the eastern States of the United States?

Mr. TRAIN. I'm getting out of my field; it's probably a dangerous area in which to speculate. I would suppose that the detoxification effect of such a substance would not operate under conditions of an explosion, if that is what your question is directed to.

Senator Cook. Apparently the Gross committee thought it might be available because they must have taken into consideration the action of the sea water at 7,000 pounds per square inch on these encasements on the ocean floor, and at least they recommended an encasement of this material in the event of an interior explosion.

If there were an internal rupture, at least there would be adequate detoxification material to neutralize the gas at this stage, whereas in its present state there is only the detoxification facilities that will be provided within the framework of the train itself.

Mr. TRAIN. I think I should perhaps reiterate, Senator, that the environmental statement filed with the Council did not cover the transportation aspects, so the particular concern you have was not before us.

Senator HOLLINGS. Back to your Council on Environmental Quality, Mr. Train. What about the remaining nerve gas? To begin with, we understand the August 1 deadline says the action of the propellant merging with the nerve gas presents a danger to the propellant itself and to the rocket. I take it that is the urgency here, that we ought to dispose of these particular selected ones. Now, you're the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality and you have got other nerve gas left down there, what is the Council going to do about those? Mr. TRAIN. I have

Senator HOLLINGS. We are closing the barn door after the horse

is gone.

Mr. TRAIN. I have no information as to any remaining nerve agent explosives on hand. There may well be. I just don't know. These things would not come to the attention of the Council unless they were reported to us by the Army in connection with some proposed action.

Senator HOLLINGS. I think the record shows that they take potentially dangerous rockets and encase them, inferring of course, there is other nerve gas in the United States. Or getting right to your statement that Senator Cook referred to, that it is inappropriate to use the oceans for the disposal of any toxic materials. Can you suggest to us legislation that will at least govern the citizens of the United States to carry out that observation? We agree with you, we don't think the ocean should be used and we think the authority should be clearly stated with respect to our citizens, and I think your Council could certainly submit suggested legislation along that line.

Mr. TRAIN. We are not ready as yet to submit our report.

your wish

As I indicated, we will include recommendations as we presently foresee it for legislation, administrative action, and further research, and so on. Now, of course our present plan is to make those recommendations available to the President. We would be happy, of course, to provide staff assistance to your staff if that should be Senator HOLLINGS. We would appreciate it. Mr. TRAIN (continuing). Without implying any policy commitment on the part of the Council. Because we simply are not ready to make such a commitment at this time in any detail.

Senator HOLLINGS. Work with us and give us what you have.

We are trying to foresee some of these problems. We are not alarmists. We are not trying to make a headline or get on TV. The fact is, I had approved the acceptance of irradiated elements so they could be stored up on the Savannah River. On the other hand, you read these statements of the Kistiakowski report to the effect that there may be lethal contamination of several cubic miles of the ocean spread near the bottom down current from the dump and a layer covering many square miles for a period of days, and then you couple that with your story of the fish itself. You say: "Many commercial fishes, for example, flounder, which occur in shallow waters off the southeastern coast of the United States migrate into deeper waters in winter." They do give us some concern about what we don't know. We know we don't know. What we do know is that toxic materials do not disappear readily at the deep ocean levels. We ought to move in and be far more careful and just not select the course of ignorance. Mr. TRAIN. Let me add one point which I think would be useful to the committee, and that is this: the evidence which we have, which is essentially the statement of expert toxicologists, indicates that the chance of an accumulation in the food chain of any of these nerve agents would be highly remote. The process of toxification itself is the process which breaks down the agent, so that as a fish was poisoned, if that was the case, in the usual case the nerve agent would undergo chemical changes and lose its toxic character and would not be accumulated in the body of that fish which then could be passed on to another fish which would eat it, unlike the usual persistent pesticide situation. Senator HOLLINGS. We understand.

Do you have any further questions?

Senator Cook. Clearly, the potential long term environmental effects of sealing the rockets in concrete were not taken into consideration at the time the decision was made. I merely want to emphasize it because with the detoxification agent available I can't for the life of me see why rockets with a total of 135,000 pounds of nerve gas were encased in concrete blocks rather than individually detoxified?

Senator HOLLINGS. Do you wish to add anything further, Mr. Train, or your colleagues? We appreciate very much your appearance here.

Senator Cook. I want an answer from the chairman on the question that I asked Mr. Train relative to whether or not the U.S. Department of Public Health gave any consideration to an outer casement of detoxification material during the movement of these objects through the United States.

Dr. McDONALD. I do not know what considerations the Surgeon General gave to this particular matter. As Chairman Train pointed out, the Army statement did not cover the transportation aspects of this project and in particular did not provide us with alternative means of transporting the materials as would ordinarily be required by the National Environmental Policy Act.

Senator Cook. I must assume that your department was aware of the recommendation of the Gross Report which stated that a jacket of decontaminating solution to neutralize the GB in the vault could be installed around the present vaults. I am again asking whether any consideration was given to such an outer jacket during the period of transportation of these units through the respective States, regardless of the effect that the deep sea would have on these jackets after they were disposed of?

Mr. TRAIN. The Council gave no consideration on that possibility and we have no knowledge of what consideration the Surgeon General gave to that recommendation. We have heard the testimony of the Army this morning, as to their reason why they didn't follow that course. But our Council has itself no direct knowledge of this, nor did it consider this possibility.

Mr. Cook. Thank you.

Senator HOLLINGS. Thank you very much.

Senator HOLLINGS. We will next have Dr. Jesse Steinfeld, Surgeon General of the Public Health Service.

Dr. Steinfeld, we appreciate very much your appearance. You can recite the entire statement that you have here or we can file the entire statement for the record with your biography, and you can summarize. STATEMENT OF DR. JESSE STEINFELD, SURGEON GENERAL, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Dr. STEINFELD. Mr. Chairman, Senator Cook, I would like to read the first part of my statement, which I can in about 6 or 8 minutes, and then respond to any questions you have.

The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has been assigned by the Congress, under section 409 of Public Law 91-121, to review proposals for transportation and/or open air testing of lethal chemical or biological warfare agents.

The Department has reviewed the particulars of Operation CHASE, that is, the proposed transportation of the 418 concrete vaults, each containing 30 M-55 GB-filled rockets, except one vault also contains one M-23 mine (without explosives) containing about 10 pounds of VX, another nerve agent, and another of the vaults contains three 155-millimeter GB-filled projectiles as well as three of the M-55 rockets.

We have made recommendations to improve the safety of a carefully planned and relatively safe movement of these munitions.

Our department wishes to take this opportunity to reassure the Congress and the American people that the transportation involved in Operation CHASE is less hazardous than that occurring daily in similar mass movements of chlorine, phosgene or LPG, liquefied petroleum gas, and anhydrous ammonia. The appellation, "nerve gas" conjures images that are true enough when weapons are ready to fire, but are not similarly appropriate when the weapons are encased in concrete.

May I review briefly the history of DHEW responsibilities and actions taken in accordance with section 409 of Public Law 91-121.

This law, enacted November 19, 1969, directs the Secretary of Defense to bring to the attention of the Secretary of HEW particulars of proposals for transportation or open air testing of any lethal chemical or biological warfare agent.

On November 26 of last year the Secretary of HEW designated the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service as the official of the Department with primary responsibility for carrying out the Secretary's responsibilities for reviewing such proposals for hazards to public health and safety which may occur, and to recommend to the Secretary of Defense precautionary measures necessary to protect public health and safety.

Also, on November 26, the Secretary of HEW requested the health agencies of the Department, namely, the National Institutes of Health, the Health Services and Mental Health Administration, and the then named Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service, to submit to the Office of the Secretary names of staff scientists who had applicable expertise and appropriate security clearance.

This permitted us to develop a roster from which review committee members could be selected. In addition, we asked the Department of Transportation on December 8, 1969, to cooperate with and make available to DHEW, experts in the field of transportation of explosives and other hazardous substances.

The Secretary of Transportation complied with the request by accrediting a panel to assist DOT in this effort.

In January of 1970, procedures for the first review were developed based on recommendations of staff members knowledgeable in this field. In February and April of 1970 two special assistants to the Surgeon General were appointed to help develop and implement these procedures.

Our review of the specific plan, which is the subject of these hearings, began when the DOD's proposal was received in my office on June 23, 1970. On June 24 I appointed a committee of HEW and DOT staff which included a group of scientists, technologists, medical care experts, and transportation experts to review the plan. Their names and biographical sketches are attached.