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,