beta and gamma. The above equation permits estimating the long term - gamma activity, provided there are one-hour dose rate measurements at . the Tocations of interest. Il. RESULTS The first step in the analysis was to comsare the dose-rete estimates developed as prescribed above with recent surveys performed for the Enewetak atoll. This comparison would indicate the magnitude of the difference due to neglecting the migration of the isotopes into the soil and plant uptake. Figure 1 is a map of the Enewetak atol} Showing the location of 3 islands chosen for the comparison--Alice, ‘Janet, and Yvonne. Table 1 lists the measured dose rate from the 1951-56 operations for these three islands as well as the 1972 estimates for the esis? component. — The 1972 survey (reported in KVOD-149) provides average exposure rates separately for csi3? and co. {Tnis latter isotope is not a fission product but results from weapon debris activation). In addition, average profiles are provided of cs 39? concentration (pCi/g) versus soil depth for Alice and Janet. It is important to note that there evidently have been no cleanup activities (which would invalidate the comparisons discussed here) on Alice and Janet. Yvonne is a different situation because of construction and earth moving activities during the testing period. Large variations in exposure rates occur on Yvonne; thus, mean levels are misleading. from the comparison. For this reason, Yvonne will be dropped : DOE ARCHIVES Table 2 provides the cs9? survey data for Alice and Janet. The dose rates can be compared directly with the estimates of Table 1. As expected, the estimates are high since among other reasons it was assumed that the activity was all on the surface. The soil profiles of activity concentration versus depth can be used to develop a pseudo dose rate by relocating the activity back to the surface. A comparison of this value with the estimate is useful in that the difference is LG