More
YraT1lONndi LOM
UL
alladlybis
LU) tlic.
AUWUSSH,
Cate
aiuw
dose assessment done by Lawrence “Livermore Laboratory and
the risk estimates done by our own independent advisors
simply confirm the essential accuracy of the information
contained in the EIS.
/
What is required is the preparation of a "record of decision"
in accordance with 40 C.F.R. §1505.2.
In response to the
October 8 request by the people of Enewetak, the earlier
Enjebi decision should be reconsidered.
In other words
the decisionmaking process which is to be guided by 40
C.F.R. Part 1505 should be commenced and the "alternatives
described in the environmental impact statement" should
be considered anew.
Id. §1505.l(e}).
Then the decision taken
and the
reasoning by which
it was
reached,
including
a
discussion of alternative courses of action which were
considered, are not to be included in the impact statement
itself, but rather set forth in "a concise public record
of decision."
Id. §1505.2(a) and (b).
If you would like to discuss this matter,
call.
you have only to
Best regards,
nn
/,
Theodore R.
xc:
R.R.
R.C.
Monroe,
Clusen,
DNA
DOE
R.G. Van Cleve, OTA
Mills, EPA
W.A .
Mitchell