The Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA), has
taken exception to the proposed criteria,
although by letter dated June 7, 1974, to
the Chairman,
the Directors of DNA states
that he ''will not contest the standards recommended
by the Commission. '' DNA believes that radiation
standards applicable to the general public are
not appropriate for the small Enewetak population
and that such use could establish an undesirable
precedent for other situations of environmental
contamination from nuclear explosives. In-their
view, application of standards for the general
public does not allow adequate consideration
of the desires of the people, especially as to
establishment of a village on JANET.
The
DNA also recommended a risk-benefit analysis
that they believe would justify the selection of
higher radiation dose levels for the cleanup
criteria.
Standards for radiation workers, or
comparisons with situations where people live
in higher ambient radiation, i.e., monazite sands
areas of India are cited as precedence for use of
higher doses.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
has commented favorably stating that they
accept the proposed criteria on an interim use
basis.
The Department of the Interior (DOI)
deferred to AEC judgement.
has
Comments received from DNA, EPA and DC.
included in Appendix 1.
Decision Criteria:
Neither national nor international bodies has >
established radiation standards or criteria?
cleanup that would apply specificatly to the
Enewetak situatic... Curreatly, cleanup crierin
are developed on an ac hoc basis with consic e-2.ior
given to sucn pertinent factors as: exposure lsv.ois.
food chains, pathways to man, land use, cost,
feasibility of cleanup, impact of cleanup, éte.
The staff has applied the principle that cleanup oi
contaminated property for use by the general
public must (1) keep predicted radiation dose
levels within a conservative interpretation and