RADIOLOGICAL CLEANUP OF ENEWETAK ATOLL
80
Planning and Programming
sampling sites for DOE. These studies proved useful in planning the
cleanup and rehabilitation of Enewetak. The most valuable by-products of
The first problem for DNA was to decide which appropriation should
fund the cleanup project. Operations at Enewetak Atoll during the various
tests had been financed primarily with Research, Development, Test and
PACE and EXPOE for the cleanup project were geological data for the
Evaluation (RDT&E) funds: RDT&E funds could be requested for the
selection of quarry sites and design of crater containmentfor radiological
contamination; and soil chemistry analyses applicable to contaminated soil
cleanup project, since their purpose was to close out an RDT&E facility
surveys.73
and since the radiological cleanup certainly would require research and -
development of new technology. However, the use of such funds for
cleanup might conflict with, and dilute, DNA’s normal RDT&E program
A NEW DIRECTOR'S NEW MISSION: SEPTEMBER 1973
funding. For this and other reasons, it was decided to treat the cleanup
project as a site-restoration and site-preparation project: i.e., preparing the
In September 1973, LTG Dunn completed his 3-year assignment. as
Enewetak Atoll.74.75 LTG Johnson did not concur and presented DNA’s
case to the ASD(ISA). The Agency had transferred the last of its
installations to the Military Services in July 1971, based on a Secretary of
Defense policy decision that DNA would not operate installations.’6 The
Air Force was proposing that an exception be madein this case, and DNA
did not have the resources to manage a base. In July 1973, the Air Force
had transferred management of Johnston Atoll to DNA, and now, before
DNA had time to assimilate that new mission, the Air Force was
proposing to transfer another installation. Nevertheless, ASD(ISA)
decided to transfer Enewetak Atoll to DNA,’? and the change of
responsibility occurred on | January 1974. In accepting the mission, DNA
and the Air Force agreed to the transfer of three Air Force manpower
positions to help manage the new mission in the Pacific. 78
FY 1975 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM:1973 - 1974
Formal guidance on funding responsibility was received from OMB on
‘18 October 1973, in a memorandum which confirmed the decisions made ©
during the previous year (see ‘‘Assignment of Responsibilities,’ above).
It recognized the incomplete state of planning for cleanup and
rehabilitation but advised the agencies to request sufficient funds to
initiate some Cleanup effort in FY 3 7 to Show continuing Administration
commitment to the cleanup and rehabilitation of the atoll. The FY 1975
President’s Budget was to reflect the following agency responsibilities:
DOD for maintaining ongoing facilities and operations in Enewetak and
for cleanup operations; DOI! for rehabilitation; and AEC for radiological
monitoring and survey.79
~.
site for DOI's construction work in the Rehabilitation Program. On this
basis, the cleanup project was treated as a Military Construction
i
Director, DNA and was replaced by Lieutenant General Warren D.
Johnson, USAF, who had been at the Agency since July 1973 as Deputy
Director for Operations and Administration. The new Director was
confronted by a new mission. The Air Force proposed that DNA assume
responsibility for operation and maintenance of theaustere base camp at
81
(MILCON) Program.8° Since MILCON channels within DOD andthe
Congress are accustomed to traditional construction projects, there were
many difficulties in explaining and justifying the more unorthodox
Enewetak Cleanup Project request through these channels.
DNA’s initial FY 1975 request was for a $35.5 million authorization for a
MILCONprogram for radiological and other cleanup efforts.8! A revised
estimate was submitted on 21 November 1973 to include an additional $1.5
million to reimburse AECfor radiological support of cleanup, as agreed at
the 7 September 1972 conference. The revised request of $37 million was
to be appropriated as follows: 312.5 million in FY 1975, $21.7 million in FY
1976, and $2.8 million in FY 1977.82
OMB/DOD Program Budget Decision Number 166 reduced the FY 1975
request to $4 million and recommended $21.2 million for FY 1976 and $10.3
million for FY 1977. The additional funding to reimburse AEC was not
addressed in the decision.83 DNA requested that funding for this support
be included, giving new totals of $21.7 million in FY 1976 and $11.3
million FY 1977.84 The President's Budget for FY 1975 requested aninitial
MILCON appropriation of $4 million to provide for initial mobilization
and base camp rehabilitation. The authorization request was approved by
the Senate Armed Services Committee; however, the House Committee
on Armed Services denied authorization of FY 1975 funds for the initial
phase of cleanup on the grounds that ‘‘insufficient planning had been
completed to permit a firm estimate of overall costs..°85 The Joint
Conference Committee upheld the House Committee’s position, thus
ending action on the matter in the first session of the 93d Congress.86
FY 1975 CONCEPT PLANNING: 1974
DNA’s original concept for accomplishing the cleanup was to contractit
out to a private construction company. Defense Agencies such as DNA