SE
et
tee
lie. Dixy Lee Ray
Page 2
April 17, 1974
i 1
quately deal with the potential problems of human habitation at
Bikini.
It does contain a short, 2 page, section entitled "sun-
mary and recommendations" which corments briefly on the advisapbility of human habitation at certain points on the atoll.
These
conclusions and recommendations are apparently based primarily on
data abtained from portable gamma survey meters which indicated
readings from less than 5 micro r/hr.
Various points in the atoll.
to over 700 micro r/fhr.
at
This report makes reference to a 1967 Ad-hoc Committee which evalu-
ated the radiological hazards of resettlement of Bikini.
sume that
this committee made
extensive written findings,
We pre-
conclu-
Sions, and recommendations.
May we please have a copy of their
report, and of any reports updating or altering their conclusions?
Are there other reports cr memoranda from AEC or other sources,
Which make recommendations about human habitation at Bikini?
if
sO, Will you please send us a copy?’
On the same topic, we understand that several years ago, Tom McCraw,
head of the ARC's
Division of Operational Sanzety, made a
trip te
Rank £51Giua CG Gistuss radiation with the S8ikini people.
‘emories
have faded considerably, however, and no one with whom we have
discussed this visit can remember exactiy what was said or even the
general tenor of the advice given.
If there are substantial raciation hazards at Bikini, and significant advisory measures that need
to be followed by the people, perhaps it would be a cood idea to
have a repeat visit by Mr. McCraw sometime shortly after the peovole
have been resettled.
in any case, it would be helpful for us to
have copies of any transcripts, notes, or reports stemming from the
earlier visit by Mr. McCraw to Kili.
Z.
A second major concern is the quality'‘of the past radiological
Surveys of Bikini.
We understand that the Division of Biclozy and
Medicine of the AEC did radiological surveys of Bikini in 1964 and
(1967.
Did these surveys collect a sufficient quantity of data to
permit truly reliable recommendations?
Our understanding of the
1972-73 Enewetak Radiological survey leads us to believe that instru-
mentation,
detection equipment,
and sampling
techniques have ali
improved considerably since 1964 and 1967.
Do vou believe that it
is advisable to have an updated radiological survey of Bikini, to
take advantage of technological advances, and to take a greater
number of soil and biota samples than was taken in 1964 and 1997?
3.
A related concern is the apparent lack of data from Bikini that
Will allow reliable estimates of internal dosages.
At least we have
not scen any reports that indicate detailed sampling, or indeed any
Significant sampling, of edible fish and plant material From Bikini
Have such samples,
EE 5 5
Cf}
Om
atoll.
in sufficient quantity, been taken?
If so,