Planning and Programming
95
retrievable storage at Savannah River.!40 The 79,000
for
United
the
9,000States
cubic yards Of contamination the radiological cleanup of
. wetak might generate clearly represented a muchgreater problem. The
was uneconomical, would generate
disposal
that CONUS
Erferees agreed
ooriderable
political
resistance, and would adversely affect the entire
ect 141 This option was dropped from further consideration in planning
Prethedisposal of contaminated material.
The conferees discussed the remaining options contained in the DEIS:
yse of the craters on Runit, with or without cement slurry and cap. It was
decided that stabilizing the radioactive contaminants in cement would
rovide retrievable storage. Until a more permanent solution was found,
retrievable storage continued to be the only method acceptable to the
United States for disposal of such waste. It had been placed in covered
trenches in Los Alamos, andin caves in Nevada, but both DNA and EPA
pelieved that cement stabilization would be necessary at Enewetak Atoll to
minimize access of the contaminants to the population and
environment. !42
The question of crater volumealso was considered at the 8 August 1974
EPA-DNA conference. The April 1974 preliminary DEIS had indicated
that Cactus Crater would be used, then Lacrosse Craterif required. It had
been estimated that there were approximately 101,800 cubic yards of
material to be placed in the crater (7,300 cubic yards of debris and scrap,
37,800 cubic yards of contaminated soil-cement mixture, and 6,700 cubic
yards in the concrete cap). It was estimated that Cactus Crater would hold
less than half of that amount (about 52,000 cubic yards). Lacrosse Crater
had an estimated volume of 105,225 cubic yards.!43 The conferees agreed
that Lacrosse Crater should befilled first, even though Cactus Crater was
closer to the island. This made covering the cap with soil, as proposed in
the preliminary DEIS, less practical (since Lacrosse was on the reef), and
that proposal was abandoned. Entombmentin Lacrosse Crater was the:
method prescribed
in
the
September
1974
DEIS
for disposal of
radiologically contaminated soil and debris. The conferees also agreed that
uncontaminated scrap and debris should be disposed of in the deepest part
of the Enewetak Atoll lagoon.!44 This was omitted from the September
1974 DEIS!45 but wasincludedin the final EIS.146
OCEAN DUMPING VERSUS CRATER CONTAINMENT:
DECEMBER1974
The AEC remained unconvinced that ocean dumping was not a viable
option for disposal of plutonium contamination. In separate letters on 9
and 23 December 1974, they argued in favor of ocean dumping instead of
~
ee
el