The two large data bases will be maintained indefinitely on magnetic tape, but the disks will eventually be reused. Any requests for data must be directed to the Nevada Operations Office, the agency responsible for long-term retention of data collected during the Enewetak cleanup. 5.9 REFLECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS On looking back over the DRI participation in the Enewetak cleanup effort, the greatest single source of continuing problems appears to have been ambiguity in the cleanup criteria. Delays were caused by the confusion over whether to use upper or lower bounds and about what constitutes a subsurface "pocket," along with other questions that were raised because of uncertainties in interpreting the criteria. The statisties group strongly recommends that criteria be clear and detailed and written in consultation with the statisticians. It would also be helpful if enough flexibility were allowed to change the criteria if field experience indicates a need for redefining guidelines. The second problem involved data base establishment and management. Some difficulties were due to such things as mixups in data formats or inconsistency in reporting locations, but others came from misunderstandings about who was responsible for what data base. It would be better to establish, before any data are collected, a single focus of responsibility for data base management. Then decisions about formats and programming to handle the types of information and retrievals needed could be made consistently for all the data bases. A related concern was the poor communications among contractors before the project began. Better communication could have helped all to understand what to expect and what was expected of each other. A specific case in point is the data bases, which would have been better from the start if consultation among contractors had taken place. Communications among contractors on-island improved with time once the project began. This problem was most evident during personnel changeovers and in times of crisis, especially when decisions were being made off-atoll. Some of these difficulties would have been eased by more conscious effort to keep everyone informed. A useful part of intra~-ERSP communication was the regular staff planning and priority meetings. These began about halfway through the project, but would have been helpful from the beginning, because they kept personnel on-island informed, and encouraged more effective coordination of effort. Also helpful was the time ERSP technical people spent working in the field with the military; this reduced the amount of garbled instructions and general confusion. The practice of field participation is recommended for projects of this type. One specific communication problem was the failure to convey clearly the inherent limitations of the technical side of the cleanup. For example, the IMP could only survey a certain number of points each day, chemical extraction of plutonium cannot be speeded up, nor ean reliable estimates be made with bad or insufficient data. Above all, "Statistics can neither create nor destroy plutonium."* These limitations must be reiterated constantly, because some people are unaware of them and others tend to forget them and must be reminded. Flexibility is an advantage in an operation like this, where many things get done only because someone invents a method or improvises some equipment to do the job. Unthinking adherence to "The Rules" will not accomplish the mission, whetherit's a statistician designing sampling plans or a boat driver retrieving people from the island Alice. Educating everyone about the reality of the situation can aid flexibility, because if they understand what is behind their efforts they can seek reasonable alternatives for reaching the goal An increased need for thorough documentation is one of the consequences of this flexibility. Not only must procedures, methods and programs be carefully documented, but also the rationale behind them, especially when something is changed or introduced. Another benefit of this, besides the historical record it provides, is that new arrivals can use the documentation to get "up to speed" on procedures and activities. This documentation is recommended to include the keeping of candid personal logs. Oftentimes, the log books contained a piece of vital information that was not in the procedures or correspondence files. Despite the qualms attached to candor in a document which may become public, frankness greatly enhances the usefulness of a project log book. *H. N. Friesen, November 1977. 152