1 DR. GRASSLE: We could add the word "limited" to "existing 



2 studies." 



3 MR. VILD: Okay, so we are going to strike "G" and "H" then? 



4 DR. TEAL: Yes, I think so. 



5 DR. MACIOLEK: Did we provide answers for "D," "E" and "F"-- 



6 DR. TEAL: "F" is no, as I see it, looking at Boehm's data, which 



7 is the only stuff we have got. He shows enhanced levels on the slope 



8 and canyon--that is what he says. 



9 DR. GRASSLE: Although the extreme case is Hudson canyon, and I 



10 think there is evidence there from the sludge materials--we are talking 



11 contaminants-- 



12 DR. TEAL: From sludge material being in Hudson Canyon. 



13 DR. MACIOLEK: All right--in Paul's presentation did we-- 



14 DR. TEAL: Generally no, but there is in Hudson Canyon. 



15 DR. GRASSLE: I think there is. 



15 DR. TEAL: I think we should be very specific about that, because 



17 there we are talking about sludge dumping, and that has not got anything 



18 to do necessarily with what this whole document is about. 



19 DR. GRASSLE: But then? 



20 DR. TEAL: I agree that it ought to be put in about--not just 



21 making that a "yes." 



22 DR. KRAEUTER: You could either put it in as a "no" or a "yes." 



23 DR. GRASSLE: You cannot put it in as a "no"-- 



24 DR. TEAL: Hudson Canyon "yes," the rest of them "no." 



25 DR. MACIOLEK: Sure. 



26 DR. BOTHNER: Did Paul Boehm review the data from the slope 



27 program? I see his diagram. There are some dots in Lydonia Canyon. 



28 DR. MACIOLEK: He did include that. 



29 DR. TEAL: Did he? Okay. I just read his report a few minutes 



30 ago--Pete, we can ask him about that. 



31 DR. BOTHNER: All right. These maps--the data has dates on it 



32 that predate the slope program. 



33 DR. MACIOLEK: No, Mike, he went back to I think even some of the 



34 benchmark data and also included the slope and rise program results. 



362 



