1 DR. KRAEUTER: As a Scientific Committee member I would not 



2 recommend it. I could not, in good conscience, looking at this limited 



3 amount of money and all the area that I have to cover. You have got to 



4 look at this as a national program, not just a regional thing. 



5 DR. VALENTINE: Was that "D?" 



6 DR. MACIOLEK: Yes. 



7 DR. GRASSLE: Is that okay now? 



8 MR. VILD: What did you decide about the lead time question? 



9 DR. GRASSLE: We dropped it. 



10 Okay. Are we ready to go back to page 9 to see if there is 



11 anything that is lost? 



12 DR. MACIOLEK: What is on page 9 seems specific now, and we seem 



13 to have written-- 



14 OR. GRASSLE: I think we have these covered. My own opinion is 



15 that it is all covered. The only thing that might be left out is some 



16 of the rather specific geochemical points, whether they may need to be 



17 somehow incorporated into the new "C"--if there needs to be some 



18 specificity in the new "C" as regards geochemistry. 



19 DR. BOTHNER: Extensive geochemistry is a given in all of these 



20 things, isn't it? 



21 DR. GRASSLE: Geochemistry is specified in "C" at the moment. 



22 DR. KRAEUTER: I think everything else we have left rather vague 



23 so that it could be planned properly. If you start doing that, people 



24 are going to want to go back to the other ones and say, "What did we 



25 mean by--" and we are going to get into a research proposal. 



26 DR. MACIOLEK: We might get some comments back from the people who 



27 aren't here today, too. 



28 DR. GRASSLE: Okay. Are there any other concerns? 



29 DR. MACIOLEK: Any minority opinions? Yes. I guess not from this 



30 group. 



31 DR. GRASSLE: Okay. We have done it. 



32 DR. VALENTINE: Now, shall we fit these other pieces together? 



33 Characterization--that little thing that I wrote about -. 



34 DR. KRAEUTER: Do we need to look at these-- 



430 



