. . . . . ,* . (!? . Tsble 25. 22, Page 24, psYagraph2, l!rtadf~it and pandanus daily intakes ●e the NVO-140 dose ●stimates foradultmles total 15.S grans uhertas Intakes of these item at Rongelap cnd UtsrLk total d87 g ●ccording to Table 2S. Dose froa these two items iS the ~fma~ reason thxt the Entwetak pople are guhled against any residence ~ (See AEC Task Group Repcmt Tables 1-4, ) If ths reduced bjebi in the EIS. intakes had been assmed in 1974, the people could have moved back to Enjcbi l%is factor clearly dtnonstratts the importance perhaps without ~ny cleanup. of diet as ststtd on page 49, paragraph 2. Moreover, it highli~hts the Recommend the lcpct of breadfruit and tmcert8inty in all estiutes. pandtnus intakes on dose estimates be highlighted in the study so that tht shaky foundation on which people who utilize the study will understand ~e-tstimates sre based. ● . . .- . I * >- . i . -i -’ a ;! -. .-.. ~ -. i f . ..1 . for Enewetak people is crgued 23. Page iS, paragraph 2. Coconut consumption l%e FC DM-J16?J “Coconut Study” of 20 Nov 78 shorn to be 0.S nuts per dsy. that for a population uf 700, and trees pzoducing 100 nuts per year, the snmber of trees required for t subsistence of 0.S nuts/day is 1,277. In other words, the entire Atoll subsistence requirtmnts could be net by planting trees on the single isltnd of Vera tnd asy trees on other islands cwld strve for income (if the world market will purchase Enexetak coconut), 20,00D trees over subsistence requirements 3?m “coconut study” would indicate till provide $100,000 intone, Thus, coconut tmc planting could be reduced by about one-half fros that mntioned in the EIS and the people KiIl meet their subsistence requirements as uell as receive more inco~e than originally anticipated. Xf Clesrly, the “coconut tree planting problem” has gone 8-Y. you believe the IOK dose estiuates of this study, then you believe there is w need to plant excessive trees, or if you bel~tye rmre trees me needed, thcnyou $0 not believe the dose ●stimates. lb, page 27, paragraph 2b and 3b. Living patte~s 24. Page 26, ptragraph are clatied to account for tiae on and coconuts frca isltnds Kate through Wilma; however, no datt is shorn for Pearl and Runit in Tsbles 2, 3, 4, 6. Raco~end expl=ation ef method for accounting for contributions from these two islands. Also, explain method for treating a group of islands, e.g, of coconut hamest, tqual weights} etc*wlg)ited by area, weighted by” fraction i 1 . iI1 i 2S. P+ge 30, parsgraph 1. Include in Table 27 the cctual reference man Ueights which are used to svoid confusion since btemational Commission On Radiation $rottction CICRP} 23 gives several weights under bone, lung, ●tc , . . . last pamgraph. Inplies that the old ICRP metsbolic are being used, New. ICRP 30calcuMions rmst be checked to see if vaSues change Sti~f@mtly fores 137 ?nd U 60, . . 26. i i . P~ge 31, (- . . ....4 :. ,. --1 .: . “ . . . . .. s?=;O.- . ● . .