132
RADIOLOGICAL CLEANUP OF ENEWETAK ATOLL
Operations Office. HQ DNA sent four representatives. Holmes & Narver’s
home office and its Pacific Test Division were both represented. The
conference
considered
overall
concepts and
policies
and
identified
potential problem areas which were resolved or assigned to specific
representatives for action. While this conference was primarily an
orientation and introduction for the second OPLAN conference, there
were several significant results:3!4
a. ERDA-NV stated that the in situ vans would not be available for
shipment until August 1977, and the Radiological Laboratory would
not be available until October 1977. They agreed, however, to review
their schedule since it was not responsive to the planned D-Day of 15
June 1977.
133
Personnel from the 20th Engineer Brigade, Fort Bragg, North
Carolina
working in three teams, surveyed cleanup worksites and provide
d detailed
input for the operations annex of the OPLAN. Their surveys
were
organized according to the work assignments in CONPLAN 1-76:
Team A
surveyed the southern islands; Team B, the northern islands;
and Team C
the crater containment worksite on Runit. Personnel from
the 84th
Engineer Battalion, U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii (USAS
CH)
surveyed Lojwa and prepared a detailed plan for construction
of the
forward camp to be located there. Personnel from the 485th Medical
Detachment,
Fort Sam
Houston, Texas, conducted extensive
entomological surveys to provide insect and rodent control data 3!5 Navy
b. Navy representatives identified a source of nonreimbursable sealift
and Air Force planners conducted surveys of the support facilitie
s they
would be utilizing.
c. Navy representatives advised that the Boat Transportation Team
more practical, less theoretical than previously, since the individ
uals
involved were, in many cases, either those who would actually
supervise
the work or those to whom they would report. Recognizing
that major
for mobilization and resupply -COMNAVSURFPAC ships
traversing the Pacific on semiannual deployments which could
provide space for heavy equipment and othercargo.
could support other on-atoll tenant requirements for inter-island
transportation, within reason.
d. Although CONPLAN I-76 encouraged a I-year, unaccompanied tour,
the Services planned to use 4- to 6-month TDY tours, which they
would fund, in order to avert the costs of moving familtes.
The second OPLAN development conference was held at Enewetak
advantages. It permitted conferees to become familiar with the field of
operations, andit isolated them from distractions so that a great amount of
work was accomplished in a short time. The conference had threeprincipal
objectives:
a. Development of a draft OPLAN.
b. Identification of personnel and materiel requirements for
mobilization, so that these could be requisitioned on a priority basis.
c. Development of an operational schedule, to include firmly
D-Day
radiological surveys).
(ihe
beginning
0!
camp
Surprises in actual contamination measurements would occur over
the
next 3 years, and to provide the cleanup project leadership with
maximum
flexibility in decision making once the situation became
clearer, the
planners translated the CONPLAN cleanup guidance for soil
excision
into:316 “In general, the ERDA guidelines provide for removal
of
removal in the range of 40 to 400 pCi/g.°°3!7
Atoll from 21 February 1977 through 9 March 1977. The location had two
estaDlIShing
The general tone of planning at this second OPLAN conference was
concentrations of plutonium soil exceeding 400 pCi/g, and for selectiv
e
SECOND OPLAN CONFERENCE:
21 FEBRUARY-9 MARCH 1977
—
Planning and Programming
constuction
and
Underthe direction of BG Lacy, the same Field Commandtriumvirate
chairmen and working group organization employed in Albuquerque were
used at Enewetak. A total of 120 representatives from the Services, other
government agencies, and various contractors participated in the
conference and the concurrent surveys.
For some reason not specified, the planners omitted referen
ce to
removal ofthe crypts on Aomon where contaminated material had
been
buried.3!8 This omission later led to suggestions from some
that the
largest crypt need not be removed. suggestions which were not accepte
d
by the Director, DNA. The CONPLAN text requiring containment
of
contaminated debris in contaminated soil-cement slurry2!? was expanded
and revised into three OPLAN provisions.
The ERDA-NV input to the OPLAN clarified the conflicting guidanc
e
on soil cleanup in earlier planning documents. The AEC Task Group
Report had, in one location, recommended that, once soil cleanup
action
wasinitiated, ‘‘the concentrations would be reduced to the lowest practica
l
level."320 In another location, and in the EIS, this suggested guidance was
inappropriately worded to the effect that, where initiated, soil cleanup
worertel
:
.
ners mterprete
this objective anew, providing guidance that the reduction should be ‘‘to
some lower number which shall be determined by cost-benefit
considerations but will usually not be below local background.’°322 This
interpretation permitted intelligent focusing of effort, made Optimum use
of precious cleanup resources, preserved the ecology of some islands, and
made possible the cleanup work that the dri-Enewetak urgently needed.