oo indicate the obvious fallacy of accerting » lo-roentgen infinity dose based on gamma dose rates measured on personnel outsice the radiation field. For exanjle, the natives fron Allinginas showed personnel dose rate readings that would approxizate nine roentgene (guwmaa) in 2} days and yet skin damage to sone degree was evident in 14 out of 16 of the personnel. the other hand, the natives froz Utirik showed no skin damage with an estinated 2,2 rosutgens in 2} days based on gamma dose rates measured on personnel. uncertainty ef these data was discussed wmder Policy II. The They do suggest, however, that if the oontanination of a relatively large area of the exposed body produces lese than one roentgen infinite ganna dose as measured by a survey meter held four inches fro: the aurface there is a large probability that bete burns will not result. zee (See also diseussion under Folisy II.) , § When the same doze rate reading is produced at a given height above a surface from « smaller area, the amount of contamination per unit area is greater (other factors being equal). Therefore, it would seem desirable to reduce the recomended dose rate levels when relatively small areas ere involved. It is recognized that radiation from another poorly, Ypot nay con= tribute to the survey meter reading when monitoring « swall area on personnel, but this haz not been taken into account, first because of the diffisulty of establiching a prior appraisal of this varlable factor end, second, whatever this contribution uay be it will now become an added safety factor. Gf course, the problem is st1l1 corylex because when considering snaller and staller areas the eventual enc point is a single particle.