1.
Comparison of the model results with recent observations
by Moss and
McInro,y of LASL (see attachment 2).
Using Moss and McInroy’s observations
Pu when multiplied
from LASL: daily urine activity of
by 20,000 gives the liver Pu burden.
Assume BNL observation
of 60 fCi/1 per 24 h.
60fCi
x 20,000 = 1.2 x 106 fCi in the liver
Regardless of whether the median or mean Pu soil concentration
is used, the
liver burden (Tables 1 and 2) of 8.6 x 103 fCi or 3.3 x 104, respectively,
based on a GTF of 10-3 ao not come close to the 1.2 x 106 fCi liver burden
calculated based on the BNL 60 fCi/1 per d of Pu and the empirical results
observed by Moss and McInroy.
Even with a GTF of 10-1 the results are less
than reported by McInroy.
Assuming a GTF of 10-3 along with the above model, the quantity of soil
which would have to be ingested to obtain liver burdens of Pu consistent with
BNL and McInroy observations would be:
use O-5 cm Pu concentration
6
Intake required = 1*2 x 103 fci
6.6 x 10 fci
Soil required to
SUPPIY Pu intake
of 106 fCi/d
=
of 5.4 pCi/g
5500fCi/d
1.OX 106 fCi/d
~=
5.4 x 10 fCi/g
= 1.0 x 106fCi/d
’85 gid
If the-gut transfer were as high as 10-2 it would require consumption of
nearly 19 g/d of soil and if the gut transfer were 10“then
N1900 g/d
(Table 3).
2.
Compare the total Pu burden (liver + bone) calculated
by the model to the
observed urinary daily excretion.
If 60 fCi/1 per day were taken as the average rate of excretion for that
year, the total quantity excreted for the year would be 60 fCi/d x 365 d =
2.19 x 104fCi.