Soil Cleanup Planning which they considered technically unsupportableonomically unsound, and environmentally counterproductive. It recommended that the soil cleanup plans, which had been developed over the past 5 years and were even then being implemented, be reviewed again. !8 THE BAIR COMMITTEE AS a result of the unsigned position paper, ERDA convened a panel of scientists at ERDA-NV on 15-17 August 1977 to review: a. AEC recommendations for cleanup and rehabilitation of Enewetak and, specifically, the criteria for plutonium (Pu-239) in soil. b. Environmental and health implications and long-term monitoring requirements for crater disposal of contaminated soil and debris on Runit. The panel was chaired by Dr. W. J. Bair of Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratory and subsequently became known as the Bair Committee. It included scientists from several disciplines. Two of the members had attended the Marshall Island Workshop. Observers and guests included most of the ERSP management; DNA’s Deputy Director for Operations, Major General William E. Shedd; BG Tate; and Colonel Charles J. Treat, USA, Field Command’s Special Assistant for Enewetak Operations. !9 Briefings were presented by ERDA representatives on that agency’s participation in developing the soil cleanup guidelines and the policy decisions to which the unsigned position paper objected. DNA also presented briefings on the implementation of the AEC guidelines in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).2° During the course of these briefings, several critical issues surfaced. THE CRITERIA ISSUE The AEC Task Group had recommended 400 pCi/g as a cleanup criterion because it had been shown, conservatively, to be equivalent to the maximum permissible concentration (MPC) in air for radioiogically unrestricted areas.2] Accordingly, a nonoccupationally exposed individual could remain continuously in such concentrations and not exceed the permissible radiation dose rate limits: 1.5 rem/yr to lung or 3 rem/yr to bone. As is frequently done, the AEC Task Group introduced a factor of ten safety margin and recommended 40 pCi/g as a criterion below which no cleanup was required. The Task Group recommended a factor of two only (safety margin) and dose limits for whole body.*? The corresponding dose at 40 pCi/g thus would be 10 percent of that permitted for an