from the AEC Task Group report on this subject (Encl 4). The chairman reiterated the FCDNA position and the fact that resources are constrained, limiting the total amount of work which can be done. This condition forces consideration of reducing the scope of work involved on Runit and the placing of priorities on tasks considered to firm requirements. 4. Dr. Pramlitt reviewed the available data, how the data was obtained and showed views of the island as it appeared during test operations and as it appears now. Printed data is at enclosure 5. There were discussions of Plutonium/Americium ratios, plutonium 238 to plutonium 239/240 ratios and uranium contamination levels. Dr. Bramlitt reviewed the work done on the Erie test site and sampling methods used on areas of southern Runit. 5. Questor The chairman asked participants to consider the,of what can be concluded from the available data and whether that data can lead to a better definition of the scope of work under conditions prevailing on Runit Island. There were discussions of the methods used to obtain available data; the relative degree of preciseness of aerial survey and in situ survey. The aerial survey technique integrates readings over approximately one hectareeach second. isopleth liwes are probably accurate to + 100 feet. Aerial survey The in situ survey integrates over a field:of view of 68.8 feet diameter and approximately three centimeters te depth. It was concluded that the data presently available would not support refinement of the scope of work involved. Further data is highly desirable. 6. The chairman then addressed the obtaining of such data. There was discussion of methods of measuring both surface level and subsurface contamination levels &