DDST Mir. Tommy F. McCraw 3. the possibilities that bad publicity will be incurred and furtner cleanup might be necessitated if Eniwetck standards ‘are approved that are more stringent than are the standards deemed satisfactory for previous cases, such as Bikini, Palomares, Thule, Hattiesburg, Grand Junction, etc. . To allow for the possibility that the cleanup might actually be to a lesser extent than is radiologically ideal, it would be wise to consider several alternative standards of cleanup, even those that are not radiologically ideal. Your Task Group can assess the radiological consequences of cleanup to the extent of each of these alternative Standards. Similarly, some group can assess the dollar cost and ecological cost for cleanup to each of these alternate standards. Presumably, responsible bodies, such as the AEC Commissioners, can recommend one or another of tnese alternative standards while acknowledging the existence of the other standards. Presenting alternative standards allows greater flexibility of approach and, furthermore, enables fall-back positions in the event that ideal radiological standards cannot be attained. Assessment of the Problem _. For the convenience of the reader, presenting an assessment of the radiological problems would be desirable. The problems, as I see them, can be summarized: 1. The short-range problem (decades) is internal radiation from strontium-90, principally from consumption of pandanus fruit. 2. In comparison with the pandanus problem above, the external exposure from fission products is, relatively, never important. : 3. Over the long-term (centuries and milenia) the hazard is plutonium, principally in the ground on the nortteast islands and,secondarily, from the plutonium belt on Runit. In my view, it is very important to recognize the basic political and sociological fact that control over the movement and living nabits of the Islanders over centuries and milenia (No. 3 above) is completely unrealistic. Similarly, control over decades. (No. 1 and 2 above) is quite unlikely, but could possibly happen. This reaffirms my belief as stated above, that alternative standards of radiological levels need to be presented and the consequences of these other standards need to be openly established. This is preparation for the possibility that future events differ from present plans. (For example, the Islanders might consume more radioactive pandanus than is presently planned.) 2 408