Soil Cleanup Planning RADIOLOGICAL CLEANUP OF ENEWETAK ATOLL and priority as the Lujor serious questions about | position of Army enginee Runit soil cleanup, 1.e., it resources available could otherislands specified in t Enewetak. His support, later in this chapter, ever leaders at Headquarters a the project, not to devote before the other islands proven futile, resulted i containment operations, THE PRIORITY ISSUE In its report on the August 1977 conference, the Bair Committee expressed concern that the cleanup project could be terminated before completion if funds and other resources appropriated for the effort proved insufficient due to underestimates of the amount of soil that had to be removed.28 This concern was shared by BG Tate and COL Treat, who made their first visit to the atoll shortly after the conference adjourned. The EIS identified four islands requiring cleanup of plutonium concentrations over 400 pCi/g: Boken, Lujor, Aomon, and Runit. Eight others in the 40 to 400 pCi/g range were listed for consideration on a caseby-case basis: Bokoluo (Alice), Bokombako (Belle), Kirunu (Clara), Louj (Daisy), Mijikadrek (Kate), Kidrinen (Lucy), Aej (Olive), and Eleleron the people any other curr (Ruby). To these, the CONPLAN and OPLAN added Enjebi for man-hours to Enjebi without more assurance that resources would be available to complete the items specifically required in the EIS. He was particularly concerned about Runit, where 58 percent of the radiological cleanup work identified in Case 3 of the EIS would be required. Therefore, during his visit, BG Tate and Mr. Ray, the ERSP Manager, agreed to move out on identifying the work to remove plutonium from the burial crypts on Aomon, identifying the Lujor soil removal requirement, and characterizing the nature and scope of work to clean Runit to required levels, 30 After BG Tate’s visit, Mr. Ray, in a letter to Field Command, expressed surprise that the cleanup of Runit was considered so important. He asked what level of confidence Field Command expected in the Runit characterization the ERSP was being tasked to carry out and what priority it should receive. He indicated that ERDA-NV could identify the work required to clean Runit or couid assist in preparing a reclama to leave Runit uncleaned and quarantined. He hinted that additional funding from DNA might be required for detailed Runit soil characterization.2! BG Tate replied that he did not consider the reclama proposal to be a viable option and that the radiological survey of Runit should meet the same standards t . patere ° ae eg mR ti Bis g bmn. | levels below 40 pCi/g29. BG Tate was unwilling to devote so many On 12 September1977, to discuss the cleanup fF discussions at ERDA h eo ea em ee consideration on a case-by-case basis. When BG Tate arrived, work was beginning on Enjebi in accordance with the initial strategy, with a view toward continuing its cleanup to qualify it for eventual residential use. Since Enjebi was not identified for cleanup under Case 3 of the EJS andit could require 6 months or longer to accomplish the cleanup, there was considerable opposition to going ahead with this effort. CONPLAN 1-76 estimates indicated that over 27,750 man-hours would be required to remove debris from the .island and over 24,000 man-hours would be required to remove the plutonium-contaminated soil concentrations to characterization of Run Stressed that it was contaminated soil for rer be permitted to evolve in DNA funding. The Dire: might be needed if ther criteria and the EIS criter Other issues in the soil in the discussions at Ef previously had received EPA guidelines for all tre in draft form by variou apply to Enewetak, then advised DNA that it » guidelines would not ap! ERDA also advised D were intended to apply identified in the AEC T potential dose to people patterns investiaged,>4 inhalation dose were Pi e.g., Pu-238 and amer based on concentratior during the AEC Radi maximum permissible c The dri-Enewetak, how