. Case 3 is considered to be the -reaponsive t the established goals and is a balance of the human, physical, an [cost parameters which must be considered. It is planned to conduct the proposed cleanup, resettlement, and rehabilitation project as outlined by Case 3. Theestiradiological dose is well below the radiation protection guides — recommendedthe AEC Task Group; all physical hazards resulting from past construction and testing will be removed and the cost is well below the mid point between other viable solutions. 5. Under the conditions of Case 3, the Enjebi People could not expact to return to their ancestral residence island of Enjebi at an early time. This would require both the Enjebi and the Enewetak People to live on land . formerly owned and occupied by only the Enewetak People. Thus, until natural decay processes reduce the exposure rates on the northern islands, there would be less land available for agriculture and some supplement to the people's diet may be needed. The people will be subjected to acceptable low levels of ionizing radiation with a relatively low risk. Some contend that the(gesidualplutoniumJevele should be established in accordance with the hot particle theory. Since this theory is controversial, not currently. accepted by existing standard setting authorities, eee and results in very severe if not impossible residual limitations for _ transuranium radionuclides, it has not been applied. ai 2 &3 the pre- -. ; guarding of the & y 18 of prime importance, Ac ceptance The major drawback to Case 3 is that itwouldpermit schedulingof the planting of crops, the construction of familyand community housi andthe resettlement the people onEnjebi Island.— Welsnrantinhe island ofRunit for an indefinite period. The | provide for quarabtine =ould be enforced by the TTPL, However, it would the eventual return of the people to Enjebi when the test plantings and environmental monitoring program indicate that it is safe to do BO. BEST AVAILABLE COPY 6-) | a ae a oe