emoale

“

'

+
te

aye x 2

Meetingte’Diacuss. pigposal"Methods.for naatologtéally Contaminated
and Non-contaminated Materials--_Enewetak AtollCleanup
2 wg’.

bes‘The ‘information’ Stained in thie‘noatingptovided-nobasis for

abandoning the disposal of radioactive conteminated material “in the Runit.
crater, ~ However, it did reinforce the ‘need* for @ studySy todetermine.the
bene geor

suitability of the crater from a geological‘Viewpoint. =! 500°" "
-

oo

. A change in-the method of disposal. to: ocean dumping wouldnot only
. increase the project cost for Case III by an estimated 10% but cause a delay
of from two to three years in disposal action while awaiting the grant of:
@ permit. Any stretch out of the project ‘work schedule after work has begun

would significantly add to project costae.

ET

.

5..
.

Recommendations._

one

Sota yee.
A

“Retain“the current. proposal, asitated in¢
the “DEIS of September 1974, to ‘dispose’of the radioactive debris resulting: from the cleanup (Case III) by
encapsulation in a concrete matrix Placed in the Runit craters and covered
with a concrete cap. <..

: Sta pe wo

ee.

a

:

¥

Epeaiiyhy
*

, «bas

“ALLEN A. ‘FUTRAL
.
. Chief, hogistics Services Division

Select target paragraph3