..............-.’ .-.-i . .. 2. Situations with soil levels receive corrective action on-a case-by-case basis. The folloting a. b. E. .. .... ... ...... .. ........ .... . .... . . . .... .. .. ......... — is provided for this evaluation: Islands with soil Ie\’els in the above range may be divided into two categori~s, those of sufficient size for construction and those that are not. of permanent houses, 239 Pu contaminated soil is better justified within Xemoval of islands such as JAN’ET or the range above for t~.e larger S.%LLY where permanent housing may someday be located and for near surface locations on the larger islands. c. The smaller islands may be considered of less concern. long-term outlook is uncertain since they are sometimes creasing in size and sometimes erroding away. Small may be washed over by storm waves and are not a safe for permanent housing. From that viewpoint, they are the same category as unnamed sandbars along the reef other islands may have disappeared or be forming. d. The amount of effort that properly may be given to soil as the soil concentration mo~’al in this range increases increases. e. Once an action is taken, the objective is to achieve a substantial reduction in plutonium soil cone entrations, and further, to reduce concentrations to the lowest practicable not to reduce them to some prescribed numerical value. .. . . ....... ... .....1 3. guidance in the 40 to 400 pCi/g range may with each area or location evaluated Their inislands site in where re - -Areas or locations sho~~ing less than 40 pCi/g do not require corrective action because of t’ne presence of plutonium alone. Recoin-mended Guides The standards for evaluation issued by FRC are recommend as the basic of exposures to indi~ziduals to Enewetak. III–9 guidance level,