association of criteria levels with island use was a surprising development to Field Commandplanners who had followed development ofthe criteria as a sampling technique to be used with the in situ system. The association between 100 pCi/g and agricultural use appeared to have no technica] basis since the AEC Task Group Reporttreated islands to be used for foodgathering and agriculture the same with respect to plutonium. Dr. Bruce Wachholz, ERDA Headquarters, briefed the panel on unofficial EPA views related to the conformanceofthe soil cleanup criteria to its forthcoming guidance, then under development, on doselimits for transuranic elements in the general environment. EPA’s verbal assessment was that the “‘less than 40 pCi/g”’ level would not be a problem and the ‘‘40-400 pCi/g”’ range mostlikely would not be a problem. During the guidance development, a very preliminary EPA document, ‘‘Draft Proposal, Federal Guidance for Plutonium in Soils, 19 August 1976,” attracted particular DNA interest 23.24.25 as it indicated a cleanup action level about a factor of three lower than the 40 pCi/g level recommended by the AEC as a very conservative guideline for the Enewetak Cleanup. 26 Guidanceofthis nature, if followed, would significantly affect quantities of soil for removal; however, informal opinions from EPA and DNA indicated that no guidance for the United States should apply to Enewetak Atoll. MG Shedd stated DNA’s view that the cleanup should proceed as planned. Mobilization was too far advanced to allow the project to be delayed for more studies, reviews, and EIS actions to consider undefined alternatives of uncertain value. The Bair Committee generally rejected the unsigned position paper’s objections and endorsed the OPLAN 600-77 soil cleanup criteria, removal, and disposal methods. There was unanimous agreement that thecriteria for contaminated soil cleanup were reasonable and that the planned emplacement of plutonium-contaminated soil and debris in concrete in Cactus Crater did not impose unacceptable environmental and health risks. The panel recommended that morespecific guidance for application of the criteria to plutonium levels between 40 and 400 pCi/g be developed for the Commander Joint Task Group (CJTG).27 Although the unsigned position paper had been thoroughly addressed and answered, its resolution set in motion events which consumed a significant amount of the project’s most critical resource—time~and substantially delayed soil Operations. These events are described in subsequent sections. cleanup