6m _ 72 Note 13 Comment by Consultants Dr. Bertell and Mr. Franke have sent the following comments. suggest that after reading them the reader review Section 5 of t (Discussions and Recommendations). Report The fact that other consultants are not quoted does not nec imply their general agreement with the entire report. sarily It is important to bear in mind that the dosage under discu ion is that from continued residence on Rongelap Island from 1978 (or t present), onwards. I will take the liberty of commenting on four technical poi Bertell and Franke bring forward. (1) The factor to convert roentgens (measured in air) to o whole-body tissue dose measured in rem is 0.7. I am puzzled by Bertell'’s remarks on this. (2) The .025 rem annual boundary-limit for nuclear faciliti the U.S. is based on the ALARA principle, as low as reasonably achievable. It does not apply to the totally different situatio Rongelap or Bikini, according to Dr. Alan Richardson, Chief of t Environmental Protection Agency Guides and Criteria Branch. (3) Their reference to the United Kingdom guide being set rem/year is in error. The guide states that not more than .05 r come from any one nuclear facility. The overall population guid still .1 rem in agreement with the ICRP, according to John Dunst recently retired Director of the U. K. National Radiation Protecth Board.. (4) The cesium guide for particular food imports into the based on the assumption that plenty of uncontaminated food is avai The decision at Rongelap rests on the average level in the whole under quite different circumstances. Section 5 recommends banni root for the time being, which would not be a hardship.