DDOA
Dr. Martin B.

14 MAY 1974

Biles

Based on data in Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the report it is incon-

Sistent to exclude the people from Enjebi.

In Table 1 with a living

pattern (D) which requires importation of pandanus and breadfruit (III)

the 30 year whole body dose is 4.4 rem.

By importing pandanus, bread-

fruit, coconut and tacca (IV) the dose becomes 3.7 rem.

This is lower

than your 4 rem criteria.
In Table 2, the same conditions apply.
[f
Table 3 were used, and the FRC exposures were permitted to apply nothing
would need to be done (Living pattern D, Current conditions I).
Under
AEC guides the importation of pandanus and breadfruit would be required.
By going to Table 4 and using the guidance applicable to Category III,
FRC Report No. 7 it appears that Living Pattern D under current conditions would be applicable. Even with the more restrictive AEC interpretation, Living Pattern D with the importation of pandanus, breadfruit

as in IV would apply.

Your present AEC Report rejects an undelayed occupation of Enjebi, as
is desired by the Enewetak people, even though the reduction factor of
two in your proposed criteria is vulnerable to accusations that this
factor conveniently delays the desired habitation, particularly in view
of (1) the unusually well-measured and well-known radiological» situation
for Enewetak,

(2) the small likelihood of other radiation sources being

on bone dose,

and (4) the lack of cost-benefit or relative risk analyses

introduced into Enewetak at a rate faster than the decay of present
radioactivity, (3) the questionable validity of applying any criteria
in this AEC Report.

“ Instead of the restrictive approach in the present AEC Report, a

broader range of rehabilitation possibilities should be available to

the Enewetak people for their judgment. The consequences of each of
these possibilities should be clearly made with the U.S. role being
to temper their judgment on the basis of well-established radiological
effects. To enable such choices to be made objectively, the particularly
prejudicial statements in your present AEC Report should be modified
accordingly.
Among these are:

p.

22:

vi

ho

;

p. 23:

statement that corrective actions '.... would
constitute an experiment involving Enjebi people”

statement about "Heroic actions would be required to
reconstitute the remaining soil ....'' on Enjebi
after corrective actions

statement about a period as long as 16 to 20 years
(two - eight to ten year periods) .... before the
island could support its inhabitants"

Select target paragraph3