132 RADIOLOGICAL CLEANUP OF ENEWETAK ATOLL Operations Office. HQ DNA sent four representatives. Holmes & Narver’s home office and its Pacific Test Division were both represented. The conference considered overall concepts and policies and identified potential problem areas which were resolved or assigned to specific representatives for action. While this conference was primarily an orientation and introduction for the second OPLAN conference, there were several significant results:3!4 a. ERDA-NV stated that the in situ vans would not be available for shipment until August 1977, and the Radiological Laboratory would not be available until October 1977. They agreed, however, to review their schedule since it was not responsive to the planned D-Day of 15 June 1977. 133 Personnel from the 20th Engineer Brigade, Fort Bragg, North Carolina working in three teams, surveyed cleanup worksites and provide d detailed input for the operations annex of the OPLAN. Their surveys were organized according to the work assignments in CONPLAN 1-76: Team A surveyed the southern islands; Team B, the northern islands; and Team C the crater containment worksite on Runit. Personnel from the 84th Engineer Battalion, U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii (USAS CH) surveyed Lojwa and prepared a detailed plan for construction of the forward camp to be located there. Personnel from the 485th Medical Detachment, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, conducted extensive entomological surveys to provide insect and rodent control data 3!5 Navy b. Navy representatives identified a source of nonreimbursable sealift and Air Force planners conducted surveys of the support facilitie s they would be utilizing. c. Navy representatives advised that the Boat Transportation Team more practical, less theoretical than previously, since the individ uals involved were, in many cases, either those who would actually supervise the work or those to whom they would report. Recognizing that major for mobilization and resupply -COMNAVSURFPAC ships traversing the Pacific on semiannual deployments which could provide space for heavy equipment and othercargo. could support other on-atoll tenant requirements for inter-island transportation, within reason. d. Although CONPLAN I-76 encouraged a I-year, unaccompanied tour, the Services planned to use 4- to 6-month TDY tours, which they would fund, in order to avert the costs of moving familtes. The second OPLAN development conference was held at Enewetak advantages. It permitted conferees to become familiar with the field of operations, andit isolated them from distractions so that a great amount of work was accomplished in a short time. The conference had threeprincipal objectives: a. Development of a draft OPLAN. b. Identification of personnel and materiel requirements for mobilization, so that these could be requisitioned on a priority basis. c. Development of an operational schedule, to include firmly D-Day radiological surveys). (ihe beginning 0! camp Surprises in actual contamination measurements would occur over the next 3 years, and to provide the cleanup project leadership with maximum flexibility in decision making once the situation became clearer, the planners translated the CONPLAN cleanup guidance for soil excision into:316 “In general, the ERDA guidelines provide for removal of removal in the range of 40 to 400 pCi/g.°°3!7 Atoll from 21 February 1977 through 9 March 1977. The location had two estaDlIShing The general tone of planning at this second OPLAN conference was concentrations of plutonium soil exceeding 400 pCi/g, and for selectiv e SECOND OPLAN CONFERENCE: 21 FEBRUARY-9 MARCH 1977 — Planning and Programming constuction and Underthe direction of BG Lacy, the same Field Commandtriumvirate chairmen and working group organization employed in Albuquerque were used at Enewetak. A total of 120 representatives from the Services, other government agencies, and various contractors participated in the conference and the concurrent surveys. For some reason not specified, the planners omitted referen ce to removal ofthe crypts on Aomon where contaminated material had been buried.3!8 This omission later led to suggestions from some that the largest crypt need not be removed. suggestions which were not accepte d by the Director, DNA. The CONPLAN text requiring containment of contaminated debris in contaminated soil-cement slurry2!? was expanded and revised into three OPLAN provisions. The ERDA-NV input to the OPLAN clarified the conflicting guidanc e on soil cleanup in earlier planning documents. The AEC Task Group Report had, in one location, recommended that, once soil cleanup action wasinitiated, ‘‘the concentrations would be reduced to the lowest practica l level."320 In another location, and in the EIS, this suggested guidance was inappropriately worded to the effect that, where initiated, soil cleanup worertel : . ners mterprete this objective anew, providing guidance that the reduction should be ‘‘to some lower number which shall be determined by cost-benefit considerations but will usually not be below local background.’°322 This interpretation permitted intelligent focusing of effort, made Optimum use of precious cleanup resources, preserved the ecology of some islands, and made possible the cleanup work that the dri-Enewetak urgently needed.