would deseribe the radiological condition at the end of the cleanup, but would not state that
an island was "safe," nor would the DOE/ERSP presume to judge DNA's allocation of
resources by certifying the adequacy of island-by-island cleanup.
Except for the removal of contaminated and activated debris (cable, steel beams and the
like), the radiological cleanup was concerned exclusively with the transuranium elements as
an inhalation hazard. Thus, most attention was given to the soil within a few centimeters of
the surface, although in a few locations relatively high transuranic concentrations dictated
subsurface soil removal also. However, the cleanup did not significantly diminish or alter the
availability of the inventory of fission product nuclides, two of which, 137Cs and 90sp, are
substantial contributors to dose, especially in the short term (a human life span). And so it
was that an island might meet the cleanup guidelines (e.g., have acceptably low transuranic
concentrations) and yet not be suitable for unrestricted rehabitation because of food chain
implications of the fission product nuclides. One could not write a "seal of approval"
regarding an individual island, much as this might be desired by the cleanup forces.
Informal agreement in principle was reached between the ERSP Manager and the Director,
DNA early in 1979, as by this time a cost-benefit methodology had evolved. Wording of the
certificates was not finalized until cleanup actions were substantially complete late in 1979
and the collection of certificates was issued in March of 1980. The following paragraph was
included in that issuance.
"Because the DNA cleanup actions were not directed at fission products (except in the
removal of debris), fission product concentrations and inventory are not addressed in the
certification. The certification document is therefore not a sufficient basis for
resettlement decisions. It is emphasized that the classifications Residence, Agricultural,
and Food Gathering are simply convenient terms pertaining only to surface concentrations
of the transuranic elements. Guidance for consideration of resettlement patterns should
be taken from current dose assessment documents."
Additional discussion, and reproductions of two certificates as issued, may be reviewed in Chapter 7.
2.2.7 Planting of Coconuts
When replanting of coconut trees was initially mentioned in 1972, there was no controversy since the
discussions at that time were quite general. The November 1973 version of the Master Plan included
new coconut planting on Janet (14,735 trees) and Yvonne (2,517 trees) among the total of 60,776
trees to be planted. When the AEC Task Group recommended deferral of new habitation and coconut
planting on Janet and indefinite quarantine of Yvonne, the Enewetak people assisted in the revision
of the Master Plan to accommodate these recommendations. Accordingly, the March 1975 Master
Plan indicated new planting of 58,259 trees, with the Janet trees to be planted at some later date.
The islands of Enewetak, Elmer (Medren), and David (Japtan) were scheduled to receive a total of
26,689 new trees. (Final 1980 planting data for these three islands show 19,643 new trees planted.
The difference is due primarily to an agreed-upon change in tree spacing.) New planting on
northeast islands Olive, Pearl, Sally, Tilda, Ursula, and Vera was scheduled in 1975 to total 13,389
trees. It was the planting on these six northeast islands that became a controversial issue in 1978.
A note of background is necessary to the understanding of how planting of about 13,000 coconut
trees could become controversial.
Commencing in 1970, individual Bikinians and Bikini families returned to resettle Bikini Atoll and to
prepare for the return of others. Initially, and for several years, these Bikinians subsisted almost
entirely upon imported foods, the newly planted trees being not yet mature.
By 1977-78, however,
coconuts were available in abundance—available135 a staple,in the people's diet and available also for
radiochemical analysis. The concentrations of 19%Cs and 9%Sr were found to be unexpectedly high,
and led to three actions: 1) a reeommendation was made to the High Commissioner that an imported
food supplement be made available to the Bikini community; 2) a recommendation was made to the
Bikini people that they reduce their consumption of locally grown terrestrial foods; and, 3) a
bio-assay program wasestablished at Bikini.
70