in the figure nor were they included “ia any dosimetric distributions for any of the nuclides. Thus all persons considered, regardless of initial age in )957, experienced a 23 year exposure interval. Pigure 19 shows dose equivalent distributions according to age and «es for 137 6, among the Rongelapege. The shape or the population distribution was Joe skewed with a wean of 1.7 /Rem and a'maximum of 9.0 Rem. 5.3 times the mean value_for 1370, on: Rongelap. ( Thus the maximum was 14° ; An examination ipf the subgroup 1 ott distributions reveals that persons who were infants at the time!of rehabi:ation at Rongelap also were the.recipients of the highey doses. This iwas due to the combined effects of lower average body mass, a higher everage ingestion rate, 1 and more rapid turnover of 137 is Cs than that for adults or even children. Tle pa- rameter having the greatest impact on the infant dose equivalent was body ass, The standard deviation forthe adult male distribution was 494 Qf the mean dose equivalent, for adult females 43% of the mean dose equivalent, and for adolescents 47%. Within a subgroup, the maximum observed dose equivalent was 4pproxi- mately twice the mean value for all distributions considered here. Figure 20 shows mean dose equivalents as a function of returning agv groups for 6505 on Rongelap. Adolescents, young adults, and adults 50 am! up were the groups receiving lower total dose equivalents, while children and middle aged persons received higher dose equivalents during the residence interval, Measured 6524 data for persons who were infants at the return date were not reported in the publications by Conard et al. Figure 21 shows the dosimetric distributions observed for members of the Rongelap population for 650. Again the population overall exhibited a skewed distribution of dose with a maximum value nearly three times the mean. (i: Jdrea demonstrated higher doses than persons who were adults during the entire ?' 39