1 DR. BOTHNER: Fred, I suggest that you change the word 



2 "feasibility" to "results." 



3 DR. GRASSLE: What line are we on? 



4 DR. MACIOLEK: Where are you? 



5 MR. VILD: No, I do not think so, because I think by "feasibility" 



6 you are also talking about economic feasibility -- 



7 DR. VALENTINE: Engineering feasibility? 



8 MR. VILD:--but also economic feasibility. You are talking about 



9 containing and transporting all of the cuttings off site, or even 



10 angl ing--now, that is going to cost more money than just cutting a 



11 straight hole and dropping it as you go. 



12 DR. BOTHNER: "Feasibility" has got more breadth. 



13 DR. VALENTINE: One question--are we down to the second one now? 



14 DR. GRASSLE: Yes. The question was raised whether we want this 



15 list of cuttings, a major fraction of drilling muds and tools. 



16 DR. VALENTINE: Is it clear what the first word in this refers to, 



17 or should we put in that the 500 meter set-back would exclude-- 



18 DR. GRASSLE: Yes. I think actually that that is a general 



19 comment-'Should be the 500 meter set-back to start each of these. Each 



20 of these phrases should start, "The 500 meter set-back would--" 



21 DR. VALENTINE: Are we going to change tools to something like 



22 refuse or debris? 



23 DR. GRASSLE: Debris. 



24 DR. KRAEUTER: Debris is much better. 



25 (Simultaneous discussion.) 



26 DR. GRASSLE: Okay. Are there other comments on page 24? 



27 DR. MACIOLEK: Now you are getting to-- 



28 DR. GRASSLE: Yes, section "B." 



29 DR. KRAEUTER: Did we check that calculation? 



30 DR. GRASSLE: Yes. We are going to delete names, right? 



31 DR. BOTHNER: That is a good idea. However, I would like to 



32 change some of the numbers because I got data from Lydonia Canyon. 



33 Rather than the fine grain sediments, which was all I had yesterday-- 



34 DR. GRASSLE: Go ahead. 



383 



