would be almost ridiculous.
The qualifications would have
to be so numerous that I think one could almost without
oo
from the immediate contact with the water, there would not be
ornaw
much concern,
wo
question say that a device in the area over a clty or away
water, this would introduce a whole new series of parameters
10
because of entrapment of materials and the immediate avail-
121
ability of both fission products and nonfission products and
12
indused radiation to living things.
13
14
A few minutes, a few hours, at most, and it
would be of little concern,
It would be an academic problem,
Some of the ones we've been talking about today,
On the other
hand, if it were in a harbor and under the water or in the
CONARD:
Did you say that over land it would not te
4
of consequence?
15 -
DONALDSON:
16
CONARD:
It would be of little consequence.
I dontt see why you wouldn'thavwa bigfallout
1T
problem with the fireball if it was close enough to the sur-
18
face to draw up and incinerate tremendous quantities of earth
19
into the cloud,
20
DONALDSON:
21
ROOT:
22
DONALDSON:
23
DUNHAM:
I'm assuming that.
A high burst, you see,
I'm assuming a high burst in contact,
I would like Dr. Wolfe to comment on this
25
question because I think I know what Warren is driving at and
25
that is that the earth is so different on the atoll than that
26
of the State of Washington in terms of radiosensitivity with
27
the tremendous amount of pine forests that maybe there would
28
pe a difference,
29
WOLFE:
I would think in the coniferous forests of
30
the Northwest that there would be widespread damage in the
31
areas of heavy fallout, damage to the extent that the forests
32
might be totally killed in areas,
33
talking to your question or not,
I don't know whether I'm
This is one important thing
StlaiienG Warted
DOE/UCLA
bal