available data indicates high subsurface contamination levels, thus reducing the effort involved. The "7 meter" criteria would set the lower bound of the iterative half distance. 7. There were discussions of techniques for taking profile samples centered primarily on advantages of backhoe versus auger. During the Erie test area investigation 40 sample sites were completed in about 10 days using the backhoe. This was accomplished in spite of the delay imposed by operating in anti-contamination clothing as required by rad-safe procedures. It was concluded that the backhoe was probably faster and provided more precise sampling. 8. The chair requested participants to address the northern half of Runit as three distinct areas, the Cactus crater area, a central area, and the Fig/Quince area, and what sampling should apply to each. The consensus was that the Cactus area, showing high levels of subsurface contamination should be treated as is the Fig/Quince area, i.e., one half distance yes-no sampling in the vicinity of locations showing high subsurface contamination. The background history of the central area provides no reason to suspect high subsurface contamination in that area. Therefore, sampling in this area should be limited to a few confirmatory samples sites in areas not covered by the available data. (This probably amounts to something on the order of 20 sites or less.) 9. The ejecta (lip) of Cactus crater presents a special problem. Past history and available data tend to indicate that there may be high subsurface contamination below the pre-detonation surface level. This level is now buried under the ejecta. This condition lead to a brief explanation of the cratering operation and the possible extent of the area to be covered by the entombment. Consensus was that this area should be considered after a better knowledge of the extent of the area to be covered is gained. If the area is to be covered by cement/soil mixture no further sampling is needed. If it is not to be covered, then sampling should be done to confirm presence or absence of greater than 409 pCi/g contamination levels, both in the ejecta and below the pre-detonation surface. 10. The method of analysis of samples was discussed. It was agreed that a gross alpha count was probably the fastest and simplest method to obtain the yes-no answer sought. This would not define the isotopic contamination content but would provide a base to be supplemented by radio-chemistry analysis which would provide the isotopic content and should be correlatable to gross alpha count for any specific area.