93 DR. DUNHAM: With things as indefinite as they appear at this point, DR. BOND: fA it will be more misleading than useful. It will never be more definite. DR. DUNHAM: I am afraid not with this particular group of exposures. DR. BOND: JI didn'task that question to get at the operational aspect. DR. out Alderson Reporting Company Washington, D. C. No, but it is an important one to get in the open and get it over. DR. DUNNING: _ 10 Dr. Dunham, I don't think we should 11 be too awfully pessimistic. 12 had film badges out there, and they actually read between @D 13 and 50 r. 14 same kind of aalculations for Rongerik as we did for Rongelap} 15 I say this morning it was 60 to 75 from memory, and looking 16 at it this noon, 17 the same kind of assumptions at Rongerik, says 75, 18 badges said 40 to 50. 19° Share of the time. 20 that we are not at somebody else's ballpark. 21 Take the Rongerik people. They If you make the same kinlof assumptions and the I find it is 75. Our calculations using and film We know that they were indoors a good To me this gives us a pretty good notion DR. DUNHAM: This is fine from what happens from 22 fallout. 2a who are trying to use this material are in-terms of other ARC 24 e Department o e iag 2. 003 S. Bigter . a DUNHAM: The thing that is bothering some of the people types of situations where exposure might occur in a matter of minutes from an external single source as opposed tp