would deseribe the radiological condition at the end of the cleanup, but would not state that an island was "safe," nor would the DOE/ERSP presume to judge DNA's allocation of resources by certifying the adequacy of island-by-island cleanup. Except for the removal of contaminated and activated debris (cable, steel beams and the like), the radiological cleanup was concerned exclusively with the transuranium elements as an inhalation hazard. Thus, most attention was given to the soil within a few centimeters of the surface, although in a few locations relatively high transuranic concentrations dictated subsurface soil removal also. However, the cleanup did not significantly diminish or alter the availability of the inventory of fission product nuclides, two of which, 137Cs and 90sp, are substantial contributors to dose, especially in the short term (a human life span). And so it was that an island might meet the cleanup guidelines (e.g., have acceptably low transuranic concentrations) and yet not be suitable for unrestricted rehabitation because of food chain implications of the fission product nuclides. One could not write a "seal of approval" regarding an individual island, much as this might be desired by the cleanup forces. Informal agreement in principle was reached between the ERSP Manager and the Director, DNA early in 1979, as by this time a cost-benefit methodology had evolved. Wording of the certificates was not finalized until cleanup actions were substantially complete late in 1979 and the collection of certificates was issued in March of 1980. The following paragraph was included in that issuance. "Because the DNA cleanup actions were not directed at fission products (except in the removal of debris), fission product concentrations and inventory are not addressed in the certification. The certification document is therefore not a sufficient basis for resettlement decisions. It is emphasized that the classifications Residence, Agricultural, and Food Gathering are simply convenient terms pertaining only to surface concentrations of the transuranic elements. Guidance for consideration of resettlement patterns should be taken from current dose assessment documents." Additional discussion, and reproductions of two certificates as issued, may be reviewed in Chapter 7. 2.2.7 Planting of Coconuts When replanting of coconut trees was initially mentioned in 1972, there was no controversy since the discussions at that time were quite general. The November 1973 version of the Master Plan included new coconut planting on Janet (14,735 trees) and Yvonne (2,517 trees) among the total of 60,776 trees to be planted. When the AEC Task Group recommended deferral of new habitation and coconut planting on Janet and indefinite quarantine of Yvonne, the Enewetak people assisted in the revision of the Master Plan to accommodate these recommendations. Accordingly, the March 1975 Master Plan indicated new planting of 58,259 trees, with the Janet trees to be planted at some later date. The islands of Enewetak, Elmer (Medren), and David (Japtan) were scheduled to receive a total of 26,689 new trees. (Final 1980 planting data for these three islands show 19,643 new trees planted. The difference is due primarily to an agreed-upon change in tree spacing.) New planting on northeast islands Olive, Pearl, Sally, Tilda, Ursula, and Vera was scheduled in 1975 to total 13,389 trees. It was the planting on these six northeast islands that became a controversial issue in 1978. A note of background is necessary to the understanding of how planting of about 13,000 coconut trees could become controversial. Commencing in 1970, individual Bikinians and Bikini families returned to resettle Bikini Atoll and to prepare for the return of others. Initially, and for several years, these Bikinians subsisted almost entirely upon imported foods, the newly planted trees being not yet mature. By 1977-78, however, coconuts were available in abundance—available135 a staple,in the people's diet and available also for radiochemical analysis. The concentrations of 19%Cs and 9%Sr were found to be unexpectedly high, and led to three actions: 1) a reeommendation was made to the High Commissioner that an imported food supplement be made available to the Bikini community; 2) a recommendation was made to the Bikini people that they reduce their consumption of locally grown terrestrial foods; and, 3) a bio-assay program wasestablished at Bikini. 70