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