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.