410019

RECEIV ED
May 29, 1979

haayot

“RB

.,

MAY o- fue

R, C. THOMPSON

wy
BSD
“Als Bafielle
P.O, Box 999

Richland, Washington U.S.A. 99352
Telephone (509)

946-242]

Telex 32-6345

Mrs. Ruth Clusen
Assistant Secretary for
Environment
Department of Energy
Washington, D.C.
20545
Dear Ruth:

The Northern Marshall Islands Advisory Group met March 27-28, 1979 at the
National Bureau of Standards in Washington. Members present were: C. W. Francis,
R. 0. Gilbert, J. W. Healy, R. QO. McClellan, C. R. Richmond, W. L. Templeton,
R. C. Thompson, B. W. Wachhoiz, and W. J. Bair. Also present were Joe Deal,
Tommy McCraw, Jay Beaufait, and Roger Ray. Joining for part of the

discussion were Nat Greenhouse (BNL), and Robert Watters (OHER).

The agenda

items were: Plans for post-cleanup assessment of Enewetak, coconut planting on
the Northern Enewetak Islands, participation of Marshallese in re-habitation
decisions, levels of radionuclides in persons who temporarily returned to

Bikini, and use of Rongelap coconut crabs for food.

An additional agenda item

at the request of Joe Deal was a review of the DOES draft statement to the
Department of Interior on assessment of radiation doses to Marshallese if
allowed to return to Eneu or Bikini Islands on the Bikini Atoll. The agenda
topics were dealt with in very frank discussions with DOE staff, who are to be
commended for their cooperation, patience and endurance.

The following are brief comments on the agenda items, including, in some cases,
the Advisory Group's recommendation:

1.

Post-Cleanup Dose and Risk Assessment
The plan for preparing a post-cleanup dose and risk assessment for Enewetak

should be documented as soon as possible concurrent with continued preparation
of the assessment. This documented plan should assist the Livermore staff
and others in carrying out the task, help headquarters staff become more

aware Of how the assessment is being done and provide a basis for the

Advisory Group comments on the adequacy of the assessment approach prior to
its completion. This should assist in minimizing misunderstanding between
the several parties involved and increase the likelihood of a satisfactory
final assessment.

The plan for a post-cleanup dose and risk assessment should provide a clear
indication of all expected inputs to preparation of dose and risk estimates,
where the inputs will come from and the dates they will be available. All
expected outputs should be clearly documented. At a minimum this should
include, for the various living pattern scenarios, estimates of body and

50 Years of Service
1929-1979

Select target paragraph3