To: We. J. Bair From: J. W. Healy fl Subject: Enewetak AG Assessment d E Nirwe ff ok I find this a difficult document to review because the data leading to the basic assumptions are not presented and dose calculation techniques and parameters area not ineludad. T became particularly suspiclous upon our review of the coconut data at the meeting and noting from Table 4 that the caconut data provides over half of the terrestrial food-path dose. Tf would feel that, at a minimum, the original data should be found and a good analysis be done. The GI uptake factors should be redone using experimental data rather than reported factors from Larsen and Bloom and Martin. At the moment the paper reminds me of the two handed scientist who says that it is safe, but on the other hand it is not safe. I still intend to get a detailed review of these factors out shortly. The inhalation pathway fis not much better. At the minimum, the inhalation should be considered separately as ambient air (with and without disturbance) and as local resuspension with time periods attached, The latter value could, perhaps, be estimated by resuspenSion factors. I cannot check the dose calculations because I do not know their basic assumptions. I would also add that it is disturbing to come down to the wire and find this type of document and uncertainty, Perhaps we should consider recommending a change in the overall management and funding of projects related to the islands so that studies to obtain needed data are expedited. More detailed comments follow: ‘YY, P. 2, line 9. The statement that the transuranics are ",,.read- ily avallable.,.to man..." is wrong. Generally, there are a number of discriminations against them, 2. P. 3, line 6. The value of 2 liters of drinking water per day geems high aS compared to the ICRP reference man, Is there evidence to support it? 3. P. 3, lines 13-14. to l is assumed. Here a plutonium to americium ratio of 2 Surely with the number of measurements that have been made, a better value could be chosen from the data. The ratio chosen appears to give much more americium than I would have expected. 4. P. 3, lines 16-18. Is there a basis for the assumption that one-half of the surface transuranic concentrations will be