Leo M. Krulitz
October 30, 1979
Page Seven
As I have said, the two principal considerations which
are relevant to a decision about Enjebi, are the likely
health effects from radiation exposure, if the island
is to be resettled, and the likely adverse impact of denying
resettlement.
The dose estimates were done and set

forth in

Group Report and in §5.6.1 of the EIS.

the AEC Task

The risk estimate,

that is the estimated number of health effects associated
with each resettlement alternative, was calculated and
set

forth

in Table

5-12,

Vol.

I of the EIS.

The same

subject is treated in the text at §5.6.2.
A comparison
of the health effects for all five cases is contained
in Table 5-13 at p. 5-51.
The health effects predicted in 1975 for the resettlement
of Enjebi are not substantially different from those which
have been calculated on the basis of the most recent data.
The dose estimates which we find in the EIS, at §5.6.1
(which are in turn drawn from the AEC Task Group Report
and the Enewetak Radiological Survey), are somewhat higher
than current predictions, I suspect, because of the
unrealistic dietary model which-was used.
See Enewetak
Radiological Survey, NVO-140, Vol. I, pp. 492-498.
(Dr.

W.L. Robison observed that "it would ..

. appear that

dose calculations based upon [the NVO-140 dietary model} may
overestimate the total dose via the food chains. . .

Id. p. 497.)

In any case, we were faced then with health

effects on the order of less than a single case of cancer
or a single genetic defect as a result of resettlement of
Enjebi, a prospect essentially the same as we now have
before us.
I have not discussed the concern with exposure from the

transuranics via the inhalation pathway.
has been improved,

That situation

insofar as more rigorous permissible

limitations have been imposed than those included in
the impact statement.
I am not sure of this, however,

but it seems to me that the soil removal may have reduced

the concentrations of fission products as well.

While it seems clear to me that the proposal to resettle
Enjebi was thoroughly studied in 1975 in the course of
the environmental impact statement, there is one serious

flaw

Select target paragraph3