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