W. J. Bair
June 18, 1979
Page 3
Also, the soil data in Appendix D are inadequate to allow us to
double check their dose calculations.
Data units are not identified,
there are too many significant digits, and the error terms are
not defined.
3)
Lack of any error analysis on final dose estimates.
Robison indicates
this will] be forthcoming at a later time, but I include it here to
emphasize how important it is that this type of analysis be conducted.
In fact, I believe the whole approach used in the paper should be
directed toward evaluating the probability that a given individual
will exceed guidelines.
difficulties.
Admittedly, this approach is fraught with
Nevertheless, I recommend that the authors begin
thinking in those terms so that some future version of the paper can
reflect the probability approach.
4)
Tables 1, 2 and 3 (giving initial dose rates, concentration ratios
and diets} are deficient in that absolutely no attempt is made to
quantify or even mention the range of errors in the data or to indicate
the number of samples involved.
I have consistently raised this
objection to past LLL dose assessments, but to no avail.
-
We should
insist that future LLL reports follow established scientific principles
and indicate whenever possible the limits of error on these types of
data.
5)
Others in the Advisory Group are more qualified than I to evaluate
whether or not the specific models used to obtain doses are satisfactory
for the Enewetak situation.
However, I think the authors should
indicate those instances (if there are any) where these models have
in any sense been validated.
For example, has Bennett's bone model
been tried on data other than that for which it was initially developed?
If so, how did it perform?
as to methodology.
estimated?
Bennett's (1973) paper is quite sketchy
For example, how were the parameters c, g, and 2%
A more crucial question is whether LLL used Bennett's
estimates of c, g and A in the Enewetak calculations.
They could be
severely criticized if that is the case since Bennett's estimates are
based on New York and San Francisco data.
The applicability of the
parameter estimates used should be established in the paper.