likely somewhat earlier than that assumed in the dose reconstruction, thus the calculated dose is likely high-sided. The log of LST-1146 also indicates setting Condition Baker and operating the fire and flushing pumps over some unspecified period of time. This implies that the ship probably operated the washdownsystem, but the dose reconstruction assumes no reduction in topside intensity due to washdown. It is noteworthy that, of the twelve valid cohort badges, two of the three badges indicated in figure 6.8 with levels at or above the calculated dose (230, 290) were assigned to cohorts of deck and gunnery personnel, and personnel normally standing bridge watches underway. This may imply exposure of the badge wearers of these cohorts during the period of fallout, while the washdownreduced the subsequentintegrated intensities below those used in the dose calculations. In this event, the calculated doseis further high-sided. In summary,the film badge dosimetry records for the eight ships discussed herein are often incomplete and potentially misleading. As discussed, careful analysis and evaluation of these records is required. Notable problemsinclude questionable validity of cohort composition, lack of recorded issue and turn-in data, and several cited cases of clearly unique but undocumented exposure activities by various individuals. It is noteworthy that, with careful application of the methods and logical inferences noted in the discussions and plotted results for each of the ships, the overall film badge doses for each ship show reasonable correlation with the reconstructed doses for the entire periods of participation. This is true even in the few cases wherethere is poor correlation for some of the discrete badging periods. 105