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