UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SEATTLE, WASHINGTON98195 QR ange] © February 26, 1973 College of Fishertes Laboratory of Radiation Ecology Dr. Nathaniel F. Barr Assistant Director for Measurement and Evaluation USAEC, Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research Washington, D. C. 20545 Dear Nat: Your letter of 12 February to the Survey and Data Evaluation Group for the Eniwetok program has prompted me to complete a letter to you that was begun upon my return from the Livermore meeting of 16 January. Part of the reason for procrastinating has been the difficulty in preparing comments that were both significant and objective. The responsibility of the Group, as I understand it to be, is to make sure that the information obtained from the analyses of samples is sufficient for making a reliable prediction of the radiation dose to the Eniwetokese upon their return to Eniwetok Atoll. At this stage, comments can be made about two aspects of the program——planning and execution of the field work. As the first meeting of the Group was on 16 January and at a time when a substantial part of the field program had been completed, comments about planning are no longer pertinent. However, I did gain the impression that although the field program was carefully and thoughtfully planned, the planners attempted to obtain all of the answers from the current program without benefit of field experience at Eniwetok and full recognition of what had been done previously. As a consequence, the program was over planned. The program would have benefited from a greater input by Dr. Held. Both Dr. Held and I attended the September planning meeting at Livermore and had the opportunity to comment, but Dr. Held did not participate as a speaker although his name appeared on the original agenda for the meeting. In regard to the 16 January meeting, there are two principal comments: one, the discussion of “Historical Data on Radioactivity at Eniwetok Atoll" should have included the history of radiometric and radiobiological surveys at Eniwetok, Bikini and Rongelap Atolls and should not have been limited to the history of nuclear detonations; and two, the discussion of terrestrial and marine food webs was based, principally, upon the work of our Laboratory and hence could have been presented more effectively by our Laboratory. Comments that I have for our Group are related to the most efficient use of the 9005109 o research effort, time, and dollars that are available to obtain the information needed for dose assessment, and are as follows: